Automatic image cropping based on ensembles of regions of interest

ABSTRACT

A crop generation system determines multiple types of saliency data and multiple crop candidates for an image. Multiple region of interest (“ROI”) ensembles are generated, indicating locations of the salient content of the image. For each crop candidate, the crop generation system calculates an evaluation score. A set of crop candidates is selected based on the evaluation scores.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 16/548,232,filed Aug. 22, 2019, the entire contents of which are incorporated byreference herein.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This disclosure relates generally to the field of image editing, andmore specifically relates to automatic cropping of a graphical digitalimage.

BACKGROUND

Image editing systems that are accessible by a personal camera device,such as a smartphone or a wearable camera, provide options for imagemodification. A personal camera device could be relatively simple orunsophisticated, with little processing power. For example, the personalcamera may lack computing resources to provide image editing softwaretools. An image editing system that is accessible by the personal cameraprovides options to modify a captured image quickly and accurately,without requiring the personal camera device to have increasedprocessing power or local storage.

In some cases, a person uses an image editing system to crop an imagethat he or she has captured using a personal camera device. The personmay desire to use the captured image in a particular computingenvironment, such as in a post to a social media platform or as abackground on a smartphone. The image editing system provides, forexample, cropping options to modify a size or shape of the image, suchas to prepare the image for presentation on the social media platform.In some cases, the person desires accurate crop candidates thataccurately preserve the content of the image. In addition, the persondesires the crop candidates to be presented rapidly or automatically,without requiring additional time or use of image editing features bythe person.

SUMMARY

According to certain embodiments, a crop generation system receives adigital graphical image as an input. A first crop candidate and a secondcrop candidate are identified for the input image. The first cropcandidate and second crop candidate each encompass different portions ofthe input image. A region of interest (“ROI”) ensemble is generated,including a first ROI and a second ROI that each encompass visualcontent indicated by saliency data for the input image. The first ROIencompasses a first portion of the input image having visual contentindicated by the saliency data. The second ROI encompasses a secondportion of the input image having different visual content indicated bythe saliency data. A first evaluation score is computed for the firstcrop candidate and a second evaluation score is computed for the secondcrop candidate. Each evaluation score indicates a preservation, by thefirst or second crop candidate, respectively, of the visual contentincluded in a combination of at least the first and second ROI. Aselected set of crop candidates is generated based on the firstevaluation score and the second evaluation score. The selected set ofcrop candidates includes the first crop candidate and excludes thesecond crop candidate. The selected set of crop candidates is providedto an image editing application.

These illustrative embodiments are mentioned not to limit or define thedisclosure, but to provide examples to aid understanding thereof.Additional embodiments are discussed in the Detailed Description, andfurther description is provided there.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Features, embodiments, and advantages of the present disclosure arebetter understood when the following Detailed Description is read withreference to the accompanying drawings, where:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram depicting an example computing environment inwhich a crop generation system 100 is implemented, according to certainembodiments;

FIG. 2 is a block diagram depicting an example of modules included in acrop generation system, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 3 is a diagram depicting an example of a crop candidate pool thatis generated based on an image, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 4 is a diagram depicting examples of multiple saliency maps andmultiple ROI ensembles that are generated based on an image, accordingto certain embodiments;

FIG. 5 is a flow chart depicting an example of a process for evaluatinga group of crop candidates, according to certain embodiments;

FIG. 6 is a diagram depicting some aspects of example techniques fordetermining composition preservation, according to certain embodiments;and

FIG. 7 is a block diagram depicting an example of a computing system forautomatic generation and evaluation of crop candidates, according tocertain embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Some existing image cropping techniques provide automatic cropping fordigital graphical images by using saliency maps to generate cropcandidates, such as by applying search strategies to saliency data.However, existing saliency-based cropping techniques lack flexibility,and are unable to integrate sophisticated rules, such as rules fordetermining which salient areas are the most important. In addition,some existing image cropping techniques identify an ROI to generate cropcandidates, but existing region-based cropping techniques are limited toidentifying an ROI based on a specific training, such as training todetect faces. The existing region-based cropping techniques are unableto determine a crop candidate for images that do not include contentrelated to the training.

Certain embodiments described herein provide for a crop generationsystem that generates and evaluates crop candidates based on at leastone region of interest (“ROI”) for multiple types of salient visualcontent in the image. In some cases, the disclosed example cropgeneration system is capable of quickly evaluating a relatively largegroup of crop candidates for an image (e.g., 1000-10000 candidates)based on multiple ROI ensembles that correspond to the multiple types ofsalient visual content, such as evaluating up to about 10,000 cropcandidates in less than about one second.

The following example is provided to introduce certain embodiments ofthe present disclosure. In this example, a crop generation systemreceives a digital graphical image from a camera device, such as animage of two dogs sitting in a grassy field. The crop generation systemgenerates a pool of crop candidates based on the image. For instance,the crop candidates could include a first crop depicting only the firstdog, a second crop depicting only the second dog, a third crop depictingonly the two dogs' heads against the backdrop of a sky, or other examplecrop candidates. The crop generation system also receives saliency datafor the image. The saliency data indicates areas of the image that drawthe attention of a person viewing the image. Examples of saliency datafor the image include an object saliency map and an eye fixationsaliency map. For instance, an object saliency map for the image of dogscould be a digital mask identifying the outlines of the dogs' bodies,and an eye fixation saliency map for the image of dogs could be a heatmap identifying the dogs' facial regions (e.g., an image area likely todraw the viewer's attention).

Continuing with this example, the crop generation system generatesmultiple ROI ensembles from the saliency data. Each ROI ensemblecorresponds respectively to one of the saliency maps, and includes atleast one ROI for each salient area. For the example image of the twodogs, for instance, an object ROI ensemble based on the object saliencymap could include multiple ROIs encompassing the outline of the firstdog, and also multiple ROIs encompassing the outline of the second dog.Also, an eye fixation ROI ensemble based on the eye fixation saliencymap could include multiple ROIs encompassing the facial regions of thedogs. The crop generation system evaluates each of the crop candidatesbased on the ROI ensembles. In the example crop generation system, theevaluation includes calculating at least one content preservation scoreand at least one composition preservation score. For each respectivecrop candidate, the content preservation score indicates a degree towhich the respective candidate preserves salient visual content in theimage, and the composition preservation score indicates a degree towhich the respective crop candidate preserves relative locations ofsalient visual content in the image. An evaluation score for arespective crop candidate is determined based on a combination of thecandidate's respective content and composition preservation scores. Forthe example image of the two dogs, for instance, a particular cropcandidate has a content preservation score calculated based on how manyof the ROIs for the dogs' outlines and facial regions are included inthe particular candidate, and also based on a ratio of how much of eachROI is included. The particular crop candidate also has a compositionpreservation score calculated based on whether each ROI has a similarlocation in the particular candidate as compared to the ROI's locationin the uncropped image. The evaluation score for the particularcandidate indicates whether the candidate includes both dogs' outlines,whether it includes both dogs' faces, how much of the outlines andfacial regions are included, and whether the outlines and faces have asimilar location within the particular candidate as they did in theexample image (e.g., centered, off-center).

Continuing with this example, the crop generation system selects one ormore of the crop candidates based on the evaluation score, or acomponent of the evaluation score. For example, the crop generationsystem generates a first modified pool of crop candidates based on acomparison of each content preservation score to a content threshold.Additionally or alternatively, the crop generation system generates asecond modified pool of crop candidates based on a comparison of eachcomposition preservation score to a composition threshold. Furthermore,the crop generation system generates a third modified pool of cropcandidates based on a comparison of each evaluation score (e.g., acombination of the content and composition preservation scores) to anevaluation threshold. In some cases, each of the content, composition,and evaluation thresholds has a respective threshold value, such that arelative importance is associated with the content, composition, andevaluation scores. The crop generation system selects one or more of thecrop candidates based on the multiple comparisons. For example, the cropgeneration system selects a crop candidate that has content,composition, and evaluation scores that each fulfill the respectivethresholds. In the example involving an image of two dogs, a first cropcandidate that includes the outlines and faces of both dogs couldfulfill the content threshold, while a second image that includes theoutline and face of only one dog, or that includes the dogs' bodies butcrops out the dogs' faces, could fail to fulfill the content threshold.Also, the first crop candidate could fulfill the composition thresholdbased on the dogs having a location that is similar to their location inthe original image (e.g., centered), while a third crop candidate couldfail to fulfill the composition threshold based on the dogs having alocation different from the original image (e.g., off-center, at an edgeof the third candidate). In this scenario, the crop generation systemcould select the first crop candidate and not select the second or thirdcandidates, based on the first candidate's fulfillment of the contentthreshold and the composition threshold.

Certain embodiments described herein can provide improvements overexisting image cropping techniques. For instance, image editing toolsoften provide automatic cropping for digital graphical images by usingsaliency maps to generate crop candidates, such as by applying searchstrategies to saliency data (e.g., searching for a most salient area).Various techniques described herein can provide improved flexibility toautomatic cropping processes. These described techniques can integraterules for determining which salient areas are the most important, intothe cropping process. For instance, selection of crop candidates basedon the comparisons of the content, composition, and evaluation scores torespective thresholds allows the crop generation system flexibility indetermining whether content, or composition, or a combination of contentand composition has a higher relative importance for a particular image.In addition, the crop generation system can be configured to apply arule indicating a relative importance of a type of saliency data (e.g.,object saliency data, eye fixation saliency data). For example, the cropgeneration system may apply a rule indicating that object saliency datahas a relatively high importance for an image of a person, and that eyefixation saliency data has a relatively high importance for an image ofa landscape. Using such rules can, in some cases, reduce the need toidentify an ROI using a trained model. For instance, although a modelcould be specifically trained to detect faces and thereby identify ROIsdepicting faces, such models may not be able to identify a cropcandidate for images that do not include content related to the training(i.e., images that do not depict faces). Embodiments described hereincan augment or otherwise improve upon such model-based techniques byenabling a crop generation system to evaluate crop candidates based onmultiple types of ROIs.

As used herein, the terms “salient” and “saliency” refer to visualregions that draw attention to themselves, relative to other visualregions. A salient area of an image, for example, is an area havingvisual characteristics that encourage the attention of a viewer. Basedon visual characteristics such as color, size, or position, the vieweris encouraged to quickly look towards the salient area, and to spendadditional time viewing the salient area, as compared to additionalareas of the image that are less salient. In some cases, saliency for anarea is determined based on relative relationships between visualcharacteristics of the area and additional visual characteristics ofadditional areas. For example, in an image depicting a bright red ball,an area including the bright red ball has a high saliency compared toadditional image areas that depict a dull grey background. However, ifthe image depicts a large number of brightly colored red balls, theexample area including the bright red ball could have a low saliencycompared to additional image areas depicting the other brightly coloredred balls.

As used herein, the terms “region of interest” and “ROI” refer to agroup of pixels in an image that depict a salient area, or a portion ofa salient area. An ROI encompasses, for example, part or all of asalient area that is indicated by a saliency map. The ROI has a boundarythat indicates the pixels that are included in the ROI (e.g., within theboundary). In some cases, the boundary could be rectangular, such as abounding box having corner coordinates (e.g., pixel coordinates) thatindicate the size and location of the ROI. Additionally oralternatively, the boundary could have another shape with additionalcoordinates (or other characteristics) that indicate the shape of theencompassed area. In some cases, an ROI includes only pixels that areassociated with the depicted salient area, such as if the ROI is smallerthan the salient area. Additionally or alternatively, an ROI includesadditional pixels that are not associated with the depicted salientarea, such as pixels associated with background areas or other salientareas of the image.

As used herein, the terms “digital graphical image” and “image” refer toimages including pixels, such as a raster image or a bitmap image. Insome cases, an image has a structure that is based on pixels, includinga visual appearance or a file format (e.g., .BMP, .JPG, .JPEG, .PNG). Animage, for example, includes a quantity of pixels arranged in one ormore arrays, and each pixel is associated with data describing theappearance of the pixel, such as color, location, transparency,saturation, or any other suitable visual characteristic. A digitalgraphical image is created or modified via a computing system, such as acamera device or a computing system executing an image editingapplication.

Referring now to the drawings, FIG. 1 depicts an example of a computingenvironment in which a crop generation system 100 is implemented. InFIG. 1, the crop generation system 100 is configured for communicatingwith a camera device 105, an image editing application 180, or both. Thecamera device 105 is depicted as a smartphone, but other implementationsare possible. For example, a camera device in the example computingenvironment could include one or more of a personal computer, a laptop,a tablet computer, a body-mounted camera system, a scanner, a digitalcamera, or any other suitable computing device capable of capturing orstoring images. In some embodiments, the crop generation system 100 isfurther configured for communicating with a storage system, such as animage repository 102, that is capable of storing a large volume ofimages, such as an image database.

In some embodiments, the image editing application 180 can be executedon the camera device 105. Additionally or alternatively, the imageediting application 180 can be executed on an additional computingsystem, such as a personal computer, a server (e.g., a serverimplementing the crop generation system 100), a virtual computing system(e.g., a virtual server, a “cloud-based” computing system), or anothersuitable computing system. In some cases, the image editing application180 is accessed by the camera device 105 via one or more networks, suchas a web-based software application that is accessible via a browser orother suitable interface application.

In FIG. 1, the crop generation system 100 receives an image 110. Forexample, the image 110 is received from one or more of the camera device105, the image editing application 180, or the image repository 102. Insome cases, the image 110 is a digital graphical image, such as an imageincluding pixels. Each pixel in the image 110 indicates graphical data,such as one or more colors (e.g., red-green-blue, RGB), locations (e.g.,coordinates), hue, saturation, or other information representinggraphical data. In some embodiments, the image 110 depicts visualcontent, such as a photograph, a graphical design, a video, a digitallyrendered drawing or other artwork, computer-generated imagery, or othersuitable types of visual content.

The crop generation system 100 determines one or more crop candidatesfor the image 110. For instance, the crop generation system 100generates a crop candidate pool 125, which includes various cropcandidates. In some embodiments, each of the crop candidates encompassesa particular portion of the image 110. For example, different cropcandidates could encompass the entirety of the image 110, a cornerportion, a central portion, a portion that overlaps with another cropcandidate, or other suitable respective portions of the image 110. Insome cases, the crop generation system 100 determines the cropcandidates based on one or more crop criteria, such as crop criteria 107that are received from (or otherwise associated with) the camera device105. For example, the crop criteria 107 indicate one or more of adimension, an aspect ratio, a resolution, or other suitable criteria. Insome cases, the criteria 107 are received from the camera device 105(e.g., via a user interface included in the camera device 105) or fromthe image editing application 180. Additionally or alternatively, thecriteria 107 are received from an additional computing system, such asfrom a network-based software application that is accessed, for example,via a user interface of the camera device 105. In some cases, the cropgeneration system 100 generates the crop candidate pool 125 based on thecrop criteria 107, such as by including crop candidates that match adimension, aspect ratio, or other indicated criteria.

In some cases, the crop generation system 100 generates (or otherwisereceives) saliency data that is generated based on the image 110, suchas saliency data 135. In some embodiments, saliency data refers todigital data indicating areas of an image that have a relatively highimportance for viewing and interpretation of the image. In some cases,the saliency data 135 includes one or more data structures that indicateregions of the image 110 that include salient visual content. Salientvisual content could include one or more of, for instance, figures,faces, brightly colored objects, an activity (e.g., throwing a ball,shaking hands), contrasting shades (e.g., dark shadows on a palesidewalk), or any other suitable visual content that is featured in animage. In some cases, salience of visual content in the image 110 isindicated by the saliency data 135. Saliency data includes, for example,data indicating whether the visual content draws attention of a viewerbased on visual characteristics of the content (e.g., color, size,location). For instance, object saliency data indicates a location ofone or more objects depicted in an image, such as a human figure, ananimal figure, a vehicle, or other depicted objects. Additionally oralternatively, eye fixation saliency data indicates a location of one ormore areas that include attention-grabbing content, such as areas withfaces, bright colors, contrasting shades, or other characteristics thatencourage attention fixation. The saliency data 135 includes one or moreof an object saliency map, an eye fixation saliency map, or otherrepresentations of salient content. In some cases, the saliency data 135indicates a location of salient visual content, such as coordinates ofpixels that are included within a salient area of the image 110.

In some embodiments, the crop generation system 100 determines at leastone ROI associated with the image 110, based on the saliency data 135.The ROI encompasses (or otherwise indicates) an image portion thatincludes salient visual content depicted in the image 110. For example,the ROI indicates coordinates (e.g., pixel coordinates) of a particularportion including a group of pixels that depict the salient visualcontent. Additionally or alternatively, the crop generation system 100generates at least one ROI ensemble, which is a set of multiple ROIs.For example, based on the saliency data 135, the crop generation system100 generates an ROI ensemble 145. In some cases, the crop generationsystem 100 generates multiple ROI ensembles based on multiple types ofsaliency data. For example, the crop generation system 100 couldgenerate an object ROI ensemble based on an object saliency map and aneye fixation ROI ensemble based on an eye fixation saliency map.

In FIG. 1, the crop generation system 100 evaluates each of the cropcandidates in the crop candidate pool 125 based on the ROI ensemble 145.Additionally or alternatively, the crop generation system 100 generatesa pool of the evaluated crop candidates, such as an evaluated cropcandidate pool 160. In some cases, each of the evaluated crop candidatesis associated with an evaluation score that is determined by the cropgeneration system 100. Each evaluation score indicates, for a particularrespective one of the crop candidates, a preservation of visual contentthat is included in the multiple ROIs in the ROI ensemble 145. Forexample, if the ensemble 145 includes a first ROI encompassing a firstportion of the image 110 and a second ROI encompassing a second portion,the evaluation score for a particular crop candidate indicates whetherthe crop candidate preserves the combination of visual contentencompassed by the first and second ROI (e.g., in the first and secondimage portions). In some cases, the evaluation score indicates a numericvalue that represents whether the particular crop candidate accuratelypreserves one or more of the content of the first and second ROI, or thecomposition of the first and second ROI within the image 110. Forexample, the evaluation score indicates one or more of whether theparticular crop candidate includes the visual content of the first andsecond ROI, a proportion of how much of the visual content is includedfrom each ROI, a centeredness of the visual content from each ROI, asimilarity of the centeredness, or other crop evaluation metrics.

Based on the evaluation scores for each of the evaluated cropcandidates, the crop generation system 100 selects one or more of theevaluated crop candidates from the evaluated candidate pool 160. Forexample, the crop generation system 100 selects the evaluated candidatesbased on a comparison of each evaluation score to a threshold, such ascandidates having an evaluation score above (or below) the threshold.Additionally or alternatively, the crop generation system 100 selectsthe evaluated candidates based on a target quantity, such as a set ofsix evaluated candidates having the six highest (or lowest) evaluationscores. In some cases, the crop generation system 100 provides theselected crop candidates, such as a set of selected candidates 170, tothe image editing application 180. Additionally or alternatively, thecrop generation system 100 provides the selected crop candidates to anadditional computing system, such as to one or more of the camera device105 or the image repository 102. In some cases, one or morecomputer-implemented image modification techniques are performed basedon the selected candidates 170. For example, the image editingapplication 180 could edit the image 110 based on one or more of theselected candidates 170, such as by cropping the image 110 based on aselected crop candidate. Additionally or alternatively, the cameradevice 105 could provide (e.g., via a user interface) an indication of aparticular candidate(s) of the selected candidates 170, and the imageediting application 180 could edit the image 110 based on the indicatedcandidate(s).

In some embodiments, a crop generation system includes multiplecomponents or software modules that are configured to perform techniquesrelated to evaluating a group of crop candidates. FIG. 2 depicts anexample of a crop generation system 200 that includes a crop candidategeneration module 220, a saliency map generation module 230, an ROIensemble generation module 240, and a crop candidate evaluation module250. In some cases, one or more of the modules 220, 230, 240, or 250 areconfigured to implement operations, such as computer-executed softwareinstructions, that perform various aspects of the evaluation techniquesdescribed herein. Additionally or alternatively, one or more of themodules 220, 230, 240, or 250 are configured to receive, from anadditional computing system, data that is related to various aspects ofthe evaluation techniques described herein. For example, a saliency mapgeneration module could be configured to communicate, via one or morenetworks, with an additional computing system that determines saliencydata based on deep learning neural network techniques.

The crop generation system 200 includes an image 210, such as a digitalgraphical image received from (or otherwise indicated by) a cameradevice, such as described in regards to FIG. 1. In FIG. 2, the cropgeneration system 200 provides the image 210 to one or more of themodules 220, 230, 240, or 250. The crop generation system 200 provides,for example, a copy of the image 210 to a particular module, or allowsthe particular module to access the image 210, or provides the image 210via another suitable technique.

For example, the crop candidate generation module 220 receives (orotherwise accesses) the image 210. Based on the image 210, the cropcandidate generation module 220 determines a pool of multiple cropcandidates, such as a crop candidate pool 225. In some cases, themultiple crop candidates are determined based on one or more criteria,such as the crop criteria 107 described in regards to FIG. 1. The cropcandidate pool 225 includes, at least, a first crop candidate 225A and asecond crop candidate 225B. Each of the multiple crop candidates of thecrop candidate pool 225, including the candidates 225A and 225B,encompasses a respective portion of the image 210. For instance,respective crop candidates could encompass a corner portion, a centralportion, or the entirety of the image 210. In some cases, multiple cropcandidates could encompass portions that are overlapping (e.g., theoverlapping portions each include a same group of one or more particularpixels), nested (e.g., a portion with smaller dimensions that is withina portion with larger dimensions), adjacent (e.g., portions that share aboundary or part of a boundary), separate (e.g., separated by one ormore pixels not included in one of the separated portions), or anycombination of these. For example (and not by way of limitation), thefirst crop candidate 225A could encompass a first portion such as a lefthalf of the image 210, and the second crop candidate 225B couldencompass a second portion such as a top half of the image 210.

Additionally or alternatively, the saliency map generation module 230receives (or otherwise accesses) the image 210. The saliency mapgeneration module 230 determines saliency data of the image 210. In thecrop generation system 200, the saliency data includes at least twotypes of saliency data, such as eye fixation saliency data and objectsaliency data. The saliency map generation module 230 generates a set ofsaliency maps, such as a saliency map set 235, that describes the typesof saliency data. For example, the saliency map set 235 includes an eyefixation saliency map and an object saliency map. Each map in thesaliency map set 235 indicates regions of the image 210 that includesalient visual content. In some cases, a particular saliency mapindicates one region, multiple regions, or zero regions. Additionally oralternatively, a quantity of regions indicated by a particular saliencymap could be the same as or different from a quantity of regionsindicated by another saliency map. For example (and not by way oflimitation), if the image 210 depicts a calm body of water, the objectsaliency map could indicate zero regions of salient visual content(e.g., no objects are visible on the body of water), and the eyefixation saliency map could indicate several regions of salient visualcontent (e.g., color gradients of water, a central area on a horizon).As an alternative example (and not by way of limitation), if the image210 depicts a standing person, the object saliency map could indicateone region of salient visual content (e.g., the shape of the person),and the eye fixation saliency map could also indicate one region ofsalient visual content (e.g., the face of the person).

In the crop generation system 200, the ROI ensemble generation module240 determines multiple ROIs associated with the image 210. The ensemblegeneration module 240 receives (or otherwise accesses) the saliency mapset 235. Additionally or alternatively, the ROI ensemble generationmodule 240 generates a set of ROI ensembles, such as an ROI ensemble set245, that describes portions of the image 210 that include visualcontent. Based on each saliency map included in the saliency map set235, the ROI ensemble generation module 240 generates a respective ROIensemble. For example, an eye fixation ROI ensemble is generated basedon the eye fixation saliency map and an object ROI ensemble is generatedbased on the object saliency map. The generated ROI ensembles areincluded in the ROI ensemble set 245. In the crop generation system 200,each ROI ensemble in the ROI ensemble set 245 includes multiple ROIs.Additionally or alternatively, a quantity of ROIs included in aparticular ROI ensemble may be the same as or different from a quantityof ROIs indicated by another ROI ensemble. Furthermore, a particular ROIensemble could include multiple ROIs that are associated with aparticular portion of salient visual content indicated by the associatedsaliency map. As a non-limiting example, if the image 210 depicts twopeople, the object ROI ensemble could include multiple ROIs for thefirst person and also multiple ROIs for the second person.

In FIG. 2, the crop candidate evaluation module 250 computes anevaluation score for each of the crop candidates in the pool 225. Theevaluation module 250 receives (or otherwise accesses) the cropcandidate pool 225 and the ROI ensemble set 245. Additionally oralternatively, the evaluation module 250 generates a set of evaluationscores, such as evaluation scores 255, that is associated with the cropcandidate pool 225. Each crop candidate is associated with an evaluationscore that indicates the respective crop candidate's preservation of thevisual content included in the ROIs of the ensemble set 245. Forexample, the evaluation scores 255 include an evaluation score 255A thatis associated with the crop candidate 225A, and an evaluation score 255Bthat is associated with the crop candidate 225B. The score 255Aindicates a preservation of the visual content in the ensemble set 245by the crop candidate 225A. The score 255B indicates a preservation ofthe visual content in the ensemble set 245 by the crop candidate 225B.

In some cases, an evaluation score in the scores 255 includes at leastone numeric value that is based on one or more comparisons of therespective crop candidate to the multiple ROI ensembles in the ensembleset 245. For example, each of the evaluation scores 255 includes anumeric value that represents whether the respective associated cropcandidate accurately preserves a combination of the visual content inthe ROIs of the ensemble set 245. Additionally or alternatively, each ofthe evaluation scores 255 is based on a combination of multiplecomponent scores. The score 255A is based on, for instance, at least onecontent preservation score indicating whether the crop candidate 225Aincludes salient visual content of the image 210, and at least onecomposition preservation score indicating whether salient visual has asimilar location (e.g., centeredness) in the crop candidate 225A ascompared to the image 210. Additionally or alternatively, the score 255Bis based on at least one content preservation score indicating theinclusion of salient visual content in the crop candidate 225B, and atleast one composition preservation score indicating the location ofsalient visual content in the crop candidate 225B. Each additionalevaluation score in the evaluation scores 255 is based on at least onecontent preservation score and at least one composition preservationscore, indicting (respectively) an inclusion and location of salientvisual content in the respective associated crop candidate. In somecases, each evaluation score is based on a combination of the contentpreservation score and composition preservation score, such as a sum, aweighted sum, or another type of combination.

In some cases, the crop generation system 200 generates a pool ofevaluated crop candidates, such as an evaluated candidate pool 260,based on the evaluation scores 255. A set of one or more evaluated cropcandidates from the pool 260 are selected based on the associatedevaluation scores, such as crop candidates having an associated scoreabove a threshold value, a highest scored quantity or percentage of cropcandidates, or another suitable selection metric for the evaluationscores. The crop generation system 200 provides one or more of theselected candidates, such as selected candidates 270, to an additionalcomputing system, such as to an image editing application (e.g., asdescribed in regards to FIG. 1).

In some embodiments, a crop generation system evaluates multiple cropcandidates based on multiple types of saliency data. For example, thecrop generation system computes an evaluation score for each of themultiple crop candidates based on component scores calculated based onan object ROI ensemble and on component scores calculated based on aneye fixation ROI ensemble. FIG. 3 is a diagram depicting an example of acrop candidate pool, such as a crop candidate pool 325, that isgenerated based on an example image, such as an image 310. FIG. 4 is adiagram depicting examples of multiple saliency maps, such as a saliencymap set 335, and multiple ROI ensembles, such as an ROI ensemble set345, that are generated based on the example image 310. In someembodiments, the image 310 is received by a crop generation system,which generates one or more of the crop candidate pool 325, the saliencymap set 335, or the ROI ensemble set 345. For example, the cropgeneration system 200 could generate one or more of the crop candidatepool 325, the saliency map set 335, or the ROI ensemble set 345, basedon techniques described in regards to FIG. 2.

In FIG. 3, the image 310 depicts a non-limiting example of a digitalgraphical image that is received by a crop generation system. The image310 includes visual content, such as the example depictions of an adultdog and a puppy. The image 310 also includes additional visual content,such as depictions of grass, shadows, or other additional content. Insome cases, the adult dog and puppy are considered salient visualcontent, and the additional content is considered background content.

In FIG. 3, the crop candidate pool 325 is generated based on the image310, such as by a crop candidate generation module. The crop candidatepool 325 includes multiple crop candidates, including crop candidate325A, crop candidate 325B, and crop candidate 325C. For convenience, andnot by way of limitation, a reproduction of the image 310 is depictedwith the crop candidate pool 325, indicating locations of the candidates325A through 325C relative to the image 310. In some cases, a cropcandidate pool may, but need not necessarily, include graphical datarepresenting an image from which crop candidates are generated. In someembodiments, the crop candidates in the candidate pool 325 arerepresented via a suitable data type or data structure, such as one ormore of coordinates (e.g., pixel coordinates), dimensions (e.g., height,width), database records, or any other suitable data.

In FIG. 3, a crop generation system generates the candidate pool 325based on one or more criteria, such as a resolution or an aspect ratio.For example, and not by way of limitation, if the candidate pool 325 isgenerated based on a criteria specifying a 3:2 aspect ratio, each of thecrop candidates in the crop candidate pool 325, including the candidates325A through 325C, has a 3:2 aspect ratio that fulfills the examplecriteria. Each of the crop candidates in the pool 325 encompasses aportion of the visual content of the image 310. For example, thecandidate 325A encompasses a portion of the adult dog's body and aportion of the ground where the dog is standing. The candidate 325Bencompasses the faces of the adult dog and the puppy, and somesurrounding ground. The candidate 325C encompasses the face of thepuppy, a portion of the adult dog's body, and some of surroundingground. In FIG. 3, the candidates 325A and 325B are overlapping, andboth encompass a particular portion of the visual content. For example,a region of pixels at the right edge of the candidate 325A is alsoencompassed at the left edge of candidate 325B (e.g., pixels depictingpart of the adult dog's body). Candidates 325B and 325C are nested, andthe visual content encompassed by candidate 325C is also encompassed by325B. For example, the dimensions of candidate 325C are smaller than thedimensions of candidate 325B, such that the boundaries and coordinatesof candidate 325C are included within (or are identical to) theboundaries and coordinates of candidate 325B. Candidates 325A and 325Care separate, and none of the visual content encompassed by candidate325A is encompassed by 325C.

In FIG. 4, the saliency map set 335 is generated based on the image 310,such as by a saliency map generation module. The saliency map set 335includes multiple saliency maps, including an object saliency map 335Cand an eye fixation saliency map 335F. For convenience, and not by wayof limitation, the saliency maps 335C and 335F are depicted as graphicalmaps (e.g., digital images, digital masks, heat maps), but otherembodiments are possible. For example, one or more of an object saliencymap or an eye fixation saliency map may be represented as a set ofnumeric values, as a database record, or other suitable data structures(including data structures not intended for human interpretation).

The object saliency map 335C indicates a location of one or more objectsdepicted in the image 310. In FIG. 4, for example, the object saliencymap 335C includes an object area 337A that corresponds to the shape ofthe adult dog and an object area 337B that corresponds to the shape ofthe puppy. In some cases, the object saliency map 335C includes data(e.g., a digital mask, a heat map) representing the object areas 337Aand 337B. In FIG. 4, background content of the image 310, such assurrounding ground or plants, is not indicated by an object area in theobject saliency map 335C.

The eye fixation saliency map 335F indicates the location of one or moreareas that are likely to draw the attention of a viewer of the image310. In FIG. 4, for example, the eye fixation saliency map 335F includesa fixation area 339A that corresponds to the face of the adult dog, afixation area 339B that corresponds to the tail of the adult dog, and afixation area 339C that corresponds to the face of the puppy. In somecases, the eye fixation saliency map 335F includes data (e.g., a heatmap) representing the fixation areas 339A, 339B, and 339C. In someembodiments, there may, but need not necessarily be, a correlationbetween an object area in an object saliency map and a fixation area inan eye fixation saliency map. For example, in FIG. 4, the object area337A, the fixation area 339A, and the fixation area 339B each correspondto the visual content of the adult dog. However, additional saliencymaps that are based on an additional image may include eye fixationareas and object areas that are not correlated with a particular portionof the visual content.

In FIG. 4, the ROI ensemble set 345 is generated based on the saliencymap set 335, such as by an ROI ensemble generation module. The ROIensemble set 345 includes multiple ROI ensembles that are generatedbased on a respective saliency map from the saliency map set 335.Additionally or alternatively, each ROI ensemble included in theensemble set 345 includes multiple ROIs that are determined based onareas of salient visual content indicated in the respective saliencymap. For convenience, and not by way of limitation, a reproduction ofthe image 310 is depicted with each ensemble in the ROI ensemble set345, indicating locations of the multiple ROIs relative to the image310.

The ROI ensemble set 345 includes an object ROI ensemble 345C that isgenerated based on the object saliency map 335C, and an eye fixation ROIensemble 345F that is generated based on the eye fixation saliency map335F. The object ROI ensemble 345C includes an ROI 347A and an ROI 347B,which are each determined based on the object area 337A (e.g., the shapeof the adult dog); and also includes an ROI 347C, which is determinedbased on the object area 337B (e.g., the shape of the puppy). The eyefixation ROI ensemble 345F includes an ROI 349A, which is determinedbased on the fixation area 339B (e.g., the tail of the adult dog); anROI 349B and an ROI 349C, which are each determined based on thefixation area 339A (e.g., the face of the adult dog); and an ROI 349D,which is determined based on the fixation area 339C (e.g., the face ofthe puppy). In some embodiments, an ROI in a particular ROI ensemble maybe one or more of overlapping with, nested in, adjacent to, or separatefrom one or more additional ROIs in the particular ROI ensemble.

For convenience, and not by way of limitation, the ROIs 347A through347C and 349A through 349D are depicted as rectangular boundaries, butother embodiments are possible. For example, an ROI may encompass anarea that is circular, triangular, polyhedral (including of ordershigher than rectangular), an irregular shape, or having any othersuitable shape. In some embodiments, an ROI ensemble that includes ROIshaving a same quantity of edges and/or corners (e.g., rectangular)provides improvements in accuracy or speed for evaluation of cropcandidates. For example, if a crop generation system generates multiplecrop candidates having rectangular shapes and an ensemble of ROIs havingrectangular shapes, corner coordinates of the multiple crop candidatesare rapidly and accurately evaluated based on corner coordinates of theROIs in the ensemble.

For convenience, and not by way of limitation, the ROIs 347A through347C and 349A through 349D are depicted graphically, but otherembodiments are possible. For example, one or more of an ROI or an ROIensemble may be represented as a set of numeric values, as a databaserecord, or other suitable data structures (including data structures notintended for human interpretation).

FIG. 5 is a flow chart depicting an example of a process 500 forevaluating a group of crop candidates. In some embodiments, such asdescribed in regards to FIGS. 1-4, a computing device executing a cropgeneration system implements operations described in FIG. 5, byexecuting suitable program code. For illustrative purposes, the process500 is described with reference to the examples depicted in FIGS. 1-4.Other implementations, however, are possible.

At block 510, the process 500 involves receiving a graphical digitalimage that depicts visual content, such as a digital photograph. Forexample, a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system100, receives an image from an additional computing system, such as thecamera device 105, the image editing application 180, or the imagerepository 102. The image includes multiple pixels that represent thevisual content, for example, based on the color, location, or relativearrangement of the pixels.

At block 520, the process 500 involves identifying at least two cropcandidates based on the image. Each of the multiple crop candidatesencompasses a respective portion of the image, such that each candidateencompasses a respective portion of the visual content. For example, acrop candidate generation module in the crop generation system generatesa pool of crop candidates, such as the crop candidate pool 225 generatedby the crop candidate generation module 220. In some cases, the cropcandidates are generated based on one or more criteria, such as the cropcriteria 107. In some cases, the crop candidate pool includes a firstcrop candidate and a second crop candidate. The first candidateencompasses a first portion of the image that depicts visual content.Additionally or alternatively, the second candidate encompasses a secondportion of the image that depicts additional visual content. In somecases, the first and second candidates encompass different portions ofthe image. Additionally or alternatively, part of the encompassedportions could be identical, and an additional part could be different.For example, the first and second candidates could encompass respectiveportions that overlap, are separated, or are nested.

At block 530, the process 500 involves generating saliency data based onthe image. The saliency data indicates regions of salient visual contentin the image. For example, a saliency map generation module, such as thesaliency map generation module 230, generates one or more of an eyefixation saliency map or an object saliency map. In some cases, the eyefixation saliency map indicates areas of the image that are likely todraw the attention of a viewer. Additionally or alternatively, theobject saliency map indicates areas that represent an object depicted inthe image.

At block 540, the process 500 involves generating one or more ROIensembles based on the saliency data. For example, an ROI ensemblegeneration module, such as the ensemble generation module 240, generatesone or more of an eye fixation ROI ensemble or an object ROI ensemble.Each ROI included in the ROI ensemble encompasses (or otherwiserepresents) a portion of the visual content included in the image. Insome cases, the ROI ensemble includes a first ROI and a second ROI. Thefirst ROI encompasses a first portion of the image that depicts visualcontent indicated by the saliency data. Additionally or alternatively,the second ROI encompasses a second portion of the image that depictsadditional visual content indicated by the saliency data. In some cases,the first and second ROIs encompass different visual content.Additionally or alternatively, part of the visual content could beidentical, and an additional part could be different. For example, thefirst and second ROIs could encompass respective portions of visualcontent that overlap, are separated, or are nested.

In some implementations of the process 500, one or more operationsrelated to block 520 are performed in parallel with operations relatedto one or more of the blocks 530 or 540. Additionally or alternatively,one or more operations related to block 520 are performed sequentiallywith operations related to one or more of the blocks 530 or 540. Forinstance, the example crop generation system could generate a cropcandidate pool prior to or subsequent to generating saliency data and anROI ensemble, or the crop candidate pool could be generated in parallelwith one or more of the saliency data or ROI ensemble.

At block 550, the process 500 involves computing an evaluation score forone or more respective crop candidates in the crop candidate pool. Theevaluation score indicates a preservation, by the respective cropcandidate, of the combination of visual content that is included in theROIs in the ROI ensemble. For example, a crop candidate evaluationmodule, such as the crop candidate evaluation module 250, calculates afirst evaluation score for the first crop candidate and a secondevaluation score for the second crop candidate. In some cases, eachevaluation score is based on multiple component scores that indicatewhether the respective crop candidate accurately preserves a particularcharacteristic of the combination of the visual content. For example, aparticular evaluation score is based on a content preservation scorethat indicates a degree to which the respective crop candidate preservesthe presence of salient visual content in the image. Additionally oralternatively, the particular evaluation score is based on a compositionpreservation score that indicates a degree to which the respective cropcandidate preserves the relative location(s) of salient visual contentin the image. In some cases, each evaluation score for a respective cropcandidate is based on a combination of the respective contentpreservation score and composition preservation score for the respectivecrop candidate.

At block 560, the process 500 involves generating a selected set of cropcandidates based on the evaluation scores. For example, the evaluationmodule compares the evaluation scores to one or more thresholds.Additionally or alternatively, a set of selected crop candidates, suchas the selected candidates 270, is generated based on the comparison ofeach evaluation score. The set of selected candidates includes, forexample, one or more crop candidates having an evaluation score above(or having another relation to) an evaluation threshold.

At block 570, the process 500 involves providing the selected set ofcrop candidates to one or more software applications implemented in acomputing environment(s). For example, the crop generation systemprovides the selected candidates to an image editing application, suchas the image editing application 180. In some cases, the softwareapplication modifies the image (or a copy of the image) based on one ormore of the selected candidates. Additionally or alternatively, theselected candidates are provided to a user via a user interface. Forexample, the image editing application could provide the selectedcandidates on a display device, such as a display associated with thecamera device 105 or an additional personal computing device.

In some embodiments, one or more operations related to one or more ofblocks 530, 540, or 550 are repeated for multiple types of saliencydata, such as object saliency data and eye fixation saliency data. Forexample, operations related to generating saliency data and generatingan ROI ensemble are performed for an object saliency map and for an eyefixation saliency map. Additionally or alternatively, some operationsrelated to computing an evaluation score for a particular crop candidateare performed based on one or more of an object ROI ensemble or an eyefixation ROI ensemble. Furthermore, some operations related to computingan evaluation score for a particular crop candidate are performed formultiple crop candidates from the candidate pool.

In some embodiments, one or more operations related to one or more ofblocks 550 or 560 are repeated for a subset of crop candidates. Forexample, the evaluation module calculates an evaluation score for eachof the crop candidates in the generated candidate pool. Additionally oralternatively, the evaluation module calculates an evaluation score fora subset of crop candidates from the generated candidate pool (e.g.,omitting calculations for candidates excluded from the subset). Forexample, a first component score, such as a content preservation score,is calculated for each candidate in the generated candidate pool. Amodified candidate pool is generated based on a subset of candidateshaving respective content preservation scores that fulfill a contentthreshold. A second component score, such as a composition preservationscore, is calculated for each candidate in the modified candidate pool.In some cases, an additional modified candidate pool is generated basedon another subset of candidates having respective compositionpreservation scores that fulfill a composition threshold. In someembodiments of the example crop generation system, an evaluation scoreis calculated for each candidate in the subset of crop candidates fromthe modified candidate pool, or from the additional modified candidatepool.

Saliency Data Generation Techniques

In a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system 200,saliency data for an image is determined based on a suitablesaliency-detection technique. For example, a saliency map generationmodule in the crop generation system could include one or more neuralnetworks that are configured to determine saliency data based on deeplearning models. Additionally or alternatively, a saliency mapgeneration module could receive saliency data, such as from anadditional computing system configured with one or more neural networkstrained to determine the saliency data.

In some cases, the saliency data includes multiple saliency mapsassociated with the image, such as saliency maps as described in regardsto FIGS. 1-5. For example, the saliency data includes an object saliencymap that includes at least one object area (or “cutout”), i.e., dataindicating a location of one or more objects depicted in the image. Theobject area is represented, for example, by one or more pixels, numericvalues, or other data types or data structures in the object saliencymap. For convenience, and not by way of limitation, an object saliencymap is designated herein as a map C or an object saliency map C. In somecases, an object saliency map C includes a digital mask havingblack-and-white pixel data, such that an object area is indicated by oneor more pixels having a value of 1 and an additional area (e.g., an areathat does not depict an object) is indicated by one or more pixelshaving a value of 0.

Additionally or alternatively, the saliency data includes an eyefixation map that includes at least one fixation area, i.e., dataindicating a location of an area that is likely to draw the attention ofa viewer of the image. The fixation area is represented, for example, byone or more pixels, numeric values, or other data types or datastructures in the eye fixation saliency map. For convenience, and not byway of limitation, an eye fixation saliency map is designated herein asa map F or an eye fixation saliency map F.

In some embodiments of an example crop generation system, at least onepost-processing stage is applied to saliency data, such as a scenedetermination stage or a region suppression stage. For example, asaliency map generation module (such as the saliency map generationmodule 230) is configured to apply a scene determination neural networkmodel to the image. Based on the scene determination neural networkmodel, the saliency map generation module determines a scene type of theimage, such a portrait, an action shot (e.g., depicting motion), alandscape, an abstract, or another suitable type of scene depicted byvisual content in the image. Additionally or alternatively, the saliencymap generation module determines a dominant object in the image (e.g.,an object that has a location, size, or other characteristic indicatingan artistic importance). In some cases, operations related todetermining the dominant object are performed based on an output fromthe scene determination neural network model. For example, the saliencymap generation module could be configured to determine the dominantobject responsive to an output indicating a portrait scene type, andfurther configured to omit the dominant object determination responsiveto an output indicating a landscape scene type.

In some cases, if the image has a dominant object, the saliency mapgeneration module is configured to apply region suppression to one ormore of the saliency maps. Equation 1 provides an example of a techniquefor region suppression.

F′=F⊙C  Eq. 1

In Equation 1, a modified eye fixation saliency map F′ is generatedbased on a pixel-wise multiplication of the eye fixation saliency map Fand the object saliency map C. For example, a pixel at a particularlocation in the eye fixation saliency map F is multiplied by acorresponding pixel having the same location in the object saliency mapC. If the pixel in the object saliency map C indicates an object (e.g.,has a value of 1), the corresponding pixel in modified eye fixationsaliency map F′ will have the same value as the pixel in map F. If thepixel in the object saliency map C indicates no object (e.g., has avalue of 0), the corresponding pixel in modified eye fixation saliencymap F′ will have a value of 0. As a non-limiting example, if the imagedepicts a person and also a reflection on a nearby window, the objectsaliency map C could indicate an object area for the person and the eyefixation saliency map F could indicate a first fixation area for theperson's face and a second fixation area for the reflection. Responsiveto a determination that the person is a dominant object in the exampleimage, the example saliency map generation module could perform regionsuppression based on Equation 1, via which pixels for the reflectionfixation area (e.g., outside of the person object area) are modified tohave a value of zero. In some cases, a crop generation system that isconfigured to apply scene determination or region suppression provides aselection of crop candidates that more accurately represent the visualcontent of an image, such as by evaluating and selecting candidatesbased on one or more of a scene type or dominant object.

Region-of-Interest Ensemble Generation Techniques

In a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system 200, anROI ensemble for an image is determined based on an analysis of saliencydata for the image. For example, an ROI ensemble generation module inthe crop generation system could compare values of pixels in a saliencymap to an ROI threshold value. In some cases, an ROI ensemble isdetermined based on an analysis of a modified saliency map, such as amodified eye fixation saliency map F′. In some embodiments, the ROIensemble generation module determines a respective ROI ensemble based ona respective ROI threshold value. For example, an object ROI ensemblecould be determined based on a comparison of pixels in an objectsaliency map C to an object ROI threshold θ_(c). Additionally oralternatively, an eye fixation ROI ensemble could be determined based ona comparison of pixels in an eye fixation saliency map F to an eyefixation ROI threshold θ_(F).

For convenience, and not by way of limitation, an object ROI ensemble isdesignated herein as an ensemble R_(c) or an object ROI ensemble R_(c).Additionally or alternatively, the object ROI ensemble R_(c) includes aset of n ROIs, such that the ensemble R_(c)={r_(c), i=1 . . . n}.

For convenience, and not by way of limitation, an eye fixation ROIensemble is designated herein as an ensemble R_(f) or an eye fixationROI ensemble R_(f). Additionally or alternatively, the eye fixation ROIensemble R_(f) includes a set of m ROIs, such that the ensembleR_(f)={r_(j),i=1 . . . m}. In some cases, n and m may (but need notnecessarily) be equal, such that ensembles R_(c) and R_(f) may (but neednot necessarily) have an equivalent quantity of ROIs.

Content Preservation Scoring Techniques

In a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system 200, anevaluation score for a particular crop candidate is determined based onone or more component scores, such as a content preservation score or acomposition preservation score. For example, a crop candidate evaluationmodule in the crop generation system computes at least one contentpreservation score for a crop candidate for an image, based oncomparisons of the crop candidate to at least one ROI ensembleassociated with the image. Additionally or alternatively, the contentpreservation score indicates whether the particular crop candidateprovides coverage of salient visual content in the image. In some cases,multiple content preservation scores (e.g., F_(p)) are determined for acrop candidate c, such as an object content preservation score F_(p)(R_(c), c) indicating coverage of content in an object ROI ensembleR_(c) and an eye fixation content preservation score F_(Pf) (R_(f), c)indicating coverage of content in an eye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f).

An example content preservation function for determining coverage, by acrop candidate c, of content in the object ROI ensemble R_(c)={r_(i),i=1. . . n} is provided in the example Equation 2. An example function fordetermining proportional coverage by the crop candidate c for aparticular ROI r_(i) is provided in the example Equation 3.

$\begin{matrix}{{F_{Pc}\left( {R_{c},c} \right)} = \frac{{n\Sigma_{i = 1}^{n}{\delta\left( {{I\left( {r_{i},c} \right)} = 1} \right)}} + {\Sigma_{i = 1}^{n}{I\left( {r_{i},c} \right)}}}{n^{2} + n}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 2} \\{{I\left( {r_{i},c} \right)} = \frac{{Overlap}\left( {r_{i},c} \right)}{{Area}\left( r_{i} \right)}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 3}\end{matrix}$

In Equation 2, the object content preservation score F_(Pc) (R_(c), c)is based on a first term indicating a sum of how many of the ROIs r_(i)are covered completely by the crop candidate c, and a second termindicating a sum of proportional coverages for all of the ROIs r_(i) bythe crop candidate c. In some cases, a sum based on the first term andthe second term is normalized, such as dividing by the quantity n of theROIs r_(i) summed with the square of the ROI quantity n. Theproportional coverage term I(r_(i), c), as described in the exampleEquation 3, indicates a ratio of how much area of a particular ROI r_(i)is covered by the crop candidate c, compared to the total area of theparticular ROI r_(i). To aid understanding, and not by way oflimitation, a value of the object content preservation score F_(Pc)(R_(c), c) is increased if the crop candidate completely covers arelatively large number of the ROIs r_(i) (e.g., such as indicated bythe first term). Furthermore, the value of the object contentpreservation score F_(Pc) (R_(c), c) is increased if the crop candidatec covers a relatively large proportion of a relatively large number ofthe ROIs r_(i) (e.g., such as indicated by the second term).

In Equation 2, the first term includes a summation term nΣ_(i=1)^(n)δ(I(r_(i),c)=1) that is multiplied by the ROI quantity n. The sigmafunction δ(I(r_(i),c)=1) is valued at 1 if the proportional coverageterm I(r_(i),c) is equal to 1, i.e., if the entire area of theparticular ROI r_(i) is covered by the crop candidate c. In addition,the sigma function δ(I(r_(i),c)=1) is valued at 0 if the proportionalcoverage term I (r_(i),c) is less than 1, i.e., if the crop candidate ccovers less than the entire area of the particular ROI r_(i). InEquation 2, the first term has an increased value if the crop candidatec completely covers the areas of a relatively large number of the ROIsr_(ti). In some cases, the first term has a maximum value of n², such asif the sigma function δ(I(r_(i),c)=1) is valued at 1 for all n of theROIs, and the summed total of the sigma function is multiplied by theROI quantity n.

In Equation 2, the second term includes a summation term Σ_(i=1)^(n)I(r_(i), c). The proportional coverage term I (r_(i), c) is summedfor all of the ROIs r_(ti). In Equation 2, the second term has anincreased value if the crop candidate c covers a relatively largeproportion of the areas of a relatively large number of the ROIs r_(i).In some cases, the second term has a maximum value of n, such as if theproportional coverage term I (r_(i), c) is 1 (e.g., indicates completecoverage) for all n of the ROIs.

In Equation 2, a maximum value of the dividend is n²+n, based on themaximum values of the first terms and second terms. In some cases, thesum of the first and second terms is normalized, such as normalizationbased on the divisor n²+n. As provided by the example Equation 2, amaximum value for the object content preservation score F_(Pc) (R_(c),c) is 1. To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation, the objectcontent preservation score F_(Pc) (R_(c), c) has a value of 1 if thecrop candidate c completely covers all of the object ROIs r_(i) that areincluded in the object ROI ensemble R_(e).

In some embodiments of the example crop generation system, the contentpreservation score is based on the object content preservation scoreF_(Pc) (R_(c), c), such as described in regards to Equations 2 and 3.Additionally or alternatively, the content preservation score is basedon the eye fixation content preservation score F_(Pf) (R_(f), c). Anexample content preservation function for determining coverage, by thecrop candidate c, of content in the eye fixation ensembleR_(f)={r_(j),j=1 . . . m} is provided in the example Equation 4. Anexample function for determining proportional coverage by the cropcandidate c for a particular ROI r_(i) is provided in the exampleEquation 5.

$\begin{matrix}{{F_{Pf}\left( {R_{f},c} \right)} = \frac{{m\;\Sigma_{j = 1}^{m}{\delta\left( {{I\left( {r_{j},c} \right)} = 1} \right)}} + {\Sigma_{j = 1}^{m}{I\left( {r_{j},c} \right)}}}{m^{2} + m}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 4} \\{{I\left( {r_{j},c} \right)} = \frac{{Overlap}\left( {r_{j},c} \right)}{{Area}\left( r_{j} \right)}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 5}\end{matrix}$

In Equation 4, the eye fixation content preservation score F_(Pf)(R_(f),c) is based on a first term indicating a sum of how many of the ROIsr_(j) are covered completely by the crop candidate c, and a second termindicating a sum of proportional coverages for all of the ROIs by thecrop candidate c. In some cases, a sum based on the first term and thesecond term is normalized, such as dividing by the quantity m of theROIs r_(j) summed with the square of the ROI quantity m. Theproportional coverage term I(r_(j), c), as described in the exampleEquation 5, indicates a ratio of how much area of a particular ROI r_(i)is covered by the crop candidate c, compared to the total area of theparticular ROI r_(j). To aid understanding, and not by way oflimitation, a value of the eye fixation content preservation scoreF_(Pf) (R_(f), c) is increased if the crop candidate c completely coversa relatively large number of the ROIs r_(j) (e.g., such as indicated bythe first term). Furthermore, the value of the eye fixation contentpreservation score F_(Pf), (R_(f), c) is increased if the crop candidatec covers a relatively large proportion of a relatively large number ofthe ROIs r_(j) (e.g., such as indicated by the second term).

In Equation 4, the first term includes a summation term Σ_(j=1)^(m)δ(I(r_(j), c)=1) that is multiplied by the ROI quantity m. The sigmafunction δ(I(r_(j),c)=1) is valued at 1 if the proportional coverageterm I(r_(j), c) is equal to 1, i.e., if the entire area of theparticular ROI r_(j) is covered by the crop candidate c. In addition,the sigma function δ(I(r_(j),c)=1) is valued at 0 if the proportionalcoverage term I(r_(j), c) is less than 1, i.e., if the crop candidate ccovers less than the entire area of the particular ROI r_(j). InEquation 4, the first term has an increased value if the crop candidatec completely covers the areas of a relatively large number of the ROIsr_(j). In some cases, the first term has a maximum value of m², such asif the sigma function δ(I(r_(j), c)=1) is valued at 1 for all m of theROIs, and the summed total of the sigma function is multiplied by theROI quantity m.

In Equation 4, the second term includes a summation term Σ_(j=1)^(m)I(r_(j), c). The proportional coverage term I(r_(j), c) is summedfor all of the ROIs In Equation 4, the second term has an increasedvalue if the crop candidate c covers a relatively large proportion ofthe areas of a relatively large number of the ROIs r_(j). In some cases,the second term has a maximum value of m, such as if the proportionalcoverage term I(r_(j), c) is 1 (e.g., indicates complete coverage) forall m of the ROIs.

In Equation 4, a maximum value of the dividend is m²+m, based on themaximum values of the first terms and second terms. In some cases, thesum of the first and second terms is normalized, such as normalizationbased on the divisor m²+m. As provided by the example Equation 4, amaximum value for the eye fixation content preservation scoreF_(Pf)(R_(f), c) is 1. To aid understanding, and not by way oflimitation, the eye fixation content preservation score F_(Pf) (R_(f),c) has a value of 1 if the crop candidate c completely covers all of theeye fixation ROIs r_(j) that are included in the eye fixation ROIensemble R_(f).

Composition Preservation Scoring Techniques

In a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system 200, anevaluation score for a particular crop candidate is determined based onone or more component scores, such as a content preservation score or acomposition preservation score. For example, a crop candidate evaluationmodule in the crop generation system computes at least one compositionpreservation score for a crop candidate for an image, based oncomparisons of the crop candidate to at least one ROI ensembleassociated with the image. Additionally or alternatively, thecomposition preservation score indicates whether the particular cropcandidate preserves the original composition of the image. In regards tothe example crop generation system, the term composition refers tospatial relations between a portion of the image and the entirety of theimage, or between multiple portions of the image. In some cases, thecomposition of an image conveys an artistic intent or emotional responseto a viewer of the image. For instance, a non-limiting example image maydepict visual content of a person sitting on a beach by an ocean. Afirst composition of the example image could include the person centeredin the image with the ocean visible in the periphery, and the firstcomposition could convey an emotional response of rest and relaxation. Asecond composition of the example image could include the ocean centeredin the image with the person visible in the periphery, and the secondcomposition could convey an emotional response of loneliness. In somecases, a crop candidate that preserves the composition of an image moreaccurately represents the image as compared to a crop candidate thatdoes not preserve the composition, such as by more accuratelyrepresenting an artistic intent of the photographer.

In some cases, multiple composition preservation scores (e.g., F_(C))are determined for a crop candidate c, such as an object compositionpreservation score F_(Cc)(R_(c), c, I) indicating compositionpreservation for an object ROI ensemble R_(c) and an eye fixationcomposition preservation score F_(Cf) (R_(f), c, I) indicatingcomposition preservation for an eye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f). Anexample composition preservation function for determining compositionsimilarities of the crop candidate c with respect to the object ROIensemble R_(c)={r_(i),i=1 . . . n} is provided in the example Equation6. An example composition preservation function for determiningcomposition similarities of the crop candidate c with respect to the eyefixation ROI ensemble R_(f)={r_(j),j=1 . . . m} is provided in theexample Equation 7. To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation,FIG. 6 is a diagram depicting some aspects of techniques for determiningcomposition preservation.

$\begin{matrix}{{F_{Cc}\left( {R_{c},c,I} \right)} = {\frac{1}{n}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n}{\min\left\{ {{\mathcal{H}\left( {r_{i},c,I} \right)},{\mathcal{V}\left( {r_{i},c,I} \right)}} \right\}}}}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 6} \\{{F_{Cf}\left( {R_{f},c,I} \right)} = {\frac{1}{n}{\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{m}{\min\left\{ {{\mathcal{H}\left( {r_{j},c,I} \right)},{\mathcal{V}\left( {r_{j},c,I} \right)}} \right\}}}}} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 7}\end{matrix}$

In Equations 6 and 7, a frame I is a bounding box that encompasses allof the ROIs included in, respectively, the object ROI ensemble R_(c) andthe eye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f). For example, the borders of animage constitute a frame. Additionally or alternatively, a tightly-fitbounding box encompassing the ROIs in an ensemble without encompassingadditional (e.g., non-ROI) visual content of the image also constitutesa frame. In some embodiments of a crop generation system, a frameindicates a boundary of visual content in an image. As a non-limitingexample, if an image has skewed or damaged visual content (e.g., thecamera device was not correctly prepared during photography), a framethat is smaller than the image provides an indication of the visualcontent. In FIG. 6, an ROI 607 is encompassed by a crop candidate 603,and the ROI 607 and the crop candidate 603 are each encompassed by aframe 601.

In Equation 6, the object composition preservation score F_(Cc)(R_(c),c, I) is based on a summation of a minimum of a horizontal compositionterm and a vertical composition term for all object ROIs r_(i) that areincluded in the object ROI ensemble R_(c)={r_(i),i=1 . . . n}. The sumof the minimum terms for the object ROI ensemble R_(c) is divided by thequantity n of the ROIs r_(i) included in the ensemble R_(c). In Equation7, the eye fixation composition preservation score F_(Cf) (R_(f), c, I)is based on a summation of a minimum of a horizontal composition termand a vertical composition term for all eye fixation ROIs r_(j) that areincluded in the eye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f)=r_(j),j=1 . . . m}. Thesum of the minimum terms for the eye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f) isdivided by the quantity m of the ROIs r_(j) included in the ensembleR_(f). To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation, a value ofthe object composition preservation score F_(Cc)(R_(c), c, I) isincreased if the crop candidate c has a relatively small horizontalcomposition term or vertical composition term value for a relativelylarge number of the object ROIs r_(j). Furthermore, a value of the eyefixation composition preservation score F_(Cf), (R_(f), c, I) isincreased if the crop candidate c has a relatively small horizontalcomposition term or vertical composition term value for a relativelylarge number of the eye fixation ROIs r_(j).

In Equation 6, the object composition preservation score F_(Cc) (R_(c),c, I) is based on a horizontal composition term

(r_(i), c, I) and a vertical composition term V(r_(i), c, I). Thehorizontal composition term

(r_(i), c, I) indicates a similarity of the horizontal centeredness ofthe object ROI r_(i) within the crop candidate compared to thehorizontal centeredness of the ROI r_(i) within the frame I. Thevertical composition term V(r_(i), c, I) indicates a similarity of thevertical centeredness of the ROI r_(i) within the crop candidate ccompared to the vertical centeredness of the ROI r_(i) within the frameI. An example function for determining the horizontal composition term

(r_(i), c, I) is provided in the example Equation 8, and an examplefunction for determining the vertical composition term V(r_(i), c, I) isprovided in the example Equation 9.

$\begin{matrix}{{\mathcal{H}\left( {r_{i},c,I} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}{{\exp\left( {{{- \frac{dx_{1}}{W}}\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}} - {\frac{dx_{2}}{W}\left( {\frac{dx_{1}}{dx_{2}} - \frac{dx_{1}^{c}}{dx_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}}} \right)}\ } & {{if}\mspace{14mu} c\mspace{14mu}{fully}\mspace{14mu}{covers}\mspace{14mu} r_{i}} \\0 & {otherwise}\end{matrix} \right.} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 8} \\{{\mathcal{V}\left( {r_{i},c,I} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}{{\exp\left( {{{- \frac{{dy}_{1}}{H}}\left( {\frac{{dy}_{2}}{{dy}_{1}} - \frac{{dy}_{2}^{c}}{{dy}_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}} - {\frac{{dy}_{2}}{H}\left( {\frac{{dy}_{1}}{{dy}_{2}} - \frac{{dy}_{1}^{c}}{{dy}_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}}} \right)}\ } & {{if}\mspace{14mu} c\mspace{14mu}{fully}\mspace{14mu}{covers}\mspace{14mu} r_{i}} \\0 & {otherwise}\end{matrix} \right.} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 9}\end{matrix}$

In Equation 7, the eye fixation composition preservation score F_(Cf),(R_(f), c, I) is based on a horizontal composition term

(r_(j), c, I) and a vertical composition term V(r₁, c, I). Thehorizontal composition term

(r_(j), c, I) indicates a similarity of the horizontal centeredness ofthe eye fixation ROI r_(j) within the crop candidate c compared towithin the frame I, and the vertical composition term V(r_(j), c, I)indicates a similarity of the vertical centeredness of the ROI r_(j)within the crop candidate c compared to within the frame I. An examplefunction for determining the horizontal composition term

(r_(j), c, I) is provided in the example Equation 10, and an examplefunction for determining the vertical composition term V(r_(j), c, I) isprovided in the example Equation 11.

$\begin{matrix}{{\mathcal{H}\left( {r_{j},c,I} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}{{\exp\left( {{{- \frac{dx_{1}}{W}}\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}} - {\frac{dx_{2}}{W}\left( {\frac{dx_{1}}{dx_{2}} - \frac{dx_{1}^{c}}{dx_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}}} \right)}\ } & {{If}\mspace{14mu} c\mspace{14mu}{fully}\mspace{14mu}{covers}\mspace{14mu} r_{j}} \\0 & {otherwise}\end{matrix} \right.} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 10} \\{{\mathcal{V}\left( {r_{j},c,I} \right)} = \left\{ \begin{matrix}{{\exp\left( {{{- \frac{{dy}_{1}}{H}}\left( {\frac{{dy}_{2}}{{dy}_{1}} - \frac{{dy}_{2}^{c}}{{dy}_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}} - {\frac{{dy}_{2}}{H}\left( {\frac{{dy}_{1}}{{dy}_{2}} - \frac{{dy}_{1}^{c}}{{dy}_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}}} \right)}\ } & {{If}\mspace{14mu} c\mspace{14mu}{fully}\mspace{14mu}{covers}\mspace{14mu} r_{j}} \\0 & {otherwise}\end{matrix} \right.} & {{Eq}.\mspace{14mu} 11}\end{matrix}$

In Equations 8 through 11, the term W is the width of the frame I, andthe term H is the height of the frame I. FIG. 6 provides an indicationof the example dimensions width W and height H of the frame 601. In someembodiments of a crop generation system, the frame I (e.g., the frame601) has width and height dimensions that are identical to thedimensions of the image for which the crop candidates are generated(e.g., image 210). Additionally or alternatively, the frame/(e.g., theframe 601) has at least one of a width or height that is smaller thanthe respective dimension of the image, and also larger than the ensembleof ROIs included in, respectively, the object ROI ensemble R_(c) or theeye fixation ROI ensemble R_(f). In some cases, the Equations 8 through11 use a particular frame I. Additionally or alternatively, multipleframes are used, such that the object composition preservation scoreF_(Cc)(R_(c),c, I) is determined based on a first frame having firstdimensions and the eye fixation composition preservation score F_(Cf),(R_(f), c, I) is determined based on a second frame having one or moredimensions that are different from the first dimensions.

In Equations 8 through 11, the horizontal composition terms and thevertical composition terms are calculated based on a determination ofthe coverage of the ROI r_(i) (or the ROI r)) by the crop candidate c.If the crop candidate c does not cover the entirety of the ROI, thehorizontal composition terms and the vertical composition terms arecalculated to be 0. To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation,if an example crop candidate does not cover an example ROI in an image,the example crop candidate could fail to represent the originalcomposition of the image with respect to the example ROI, and ahorizontal (or vertical) composition term for the example crop candidatecould be calculated as 0 with respect to the example ROI.

If the crop candidate c does cover the entirety of the ROI, thehorizontal composition terms and the vertical composition terms arecalculated based on a difference between distance ratios. For thehorizontal composition terms

(r_(i), c, and

(r_(j), c, I), the distance ratios are based on: a left frame distancedx₁ from a left edge of the ROI to a left edge of the frame I; a rightframe distance dx₂ from a right edge of the ROI to a right edge of theframe I; a left crop distance dx₂ from the left edge of the ROI to aleft edge of the crop candidate c; and a right crop distance dx₁ ^(c)from the right edge of the ROI to a right edge of the crop candidate c.For the vertical composition terms V(r_(i), c, I) and V(r_(j), c, I),the distance ratios are based on: a top frame distance dy₁ from a topedge of the ROI to a top edge of the frame I; a bottom frame distancedy₂ from a bottom edge of the ROI to a bottom edge of the frame I; a topcrop distance dy₁ ^(c) from the top edge of the ROI to a top edge of thecrop candidate c; and a bottom crop distance dy₂ ^(c) from the bottomedge of the ROI to a bottom edge of the crop candidate c. FIG. 6 depictsexamples of the frame distances and crop distances for an exampleconfiguration of the frame 601, crop candidate 603, and ROI 607.

The Equations 8 and 10 include a first horizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

that indicates a squared difference between a ratio of the right framedistance dx₂ to the left frame distance dx₁, and a ratio of the rightcrop distance dx₂ ^(c) to the left crop distance dx₁ ^(c). The Equations8 and 10 also include a second horizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{1}}{dx_{2}} - \frac{dx_{1}^{c}}{dx_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

that indicates a squared difference between a ratio of the left framedistance dx₁ to the right frame distance dx₂, and a ratio of the leftcrop distance dx₁ ^(c) to the right crop distancedx₂ ^(c). The Equations9 and 11 include a first vertical term

$\left( {\frac{dy_{2}}{dy_{1}} - \frac{dy_{2}^{c}}{dy_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

that indicates a squared difference between a ratio of the bottom framedistance dy₂ to the top frame distance dy₁, and a ratio of the bottomcrop distance dy₂ ^(c) to the top crop distance dy₁ ^(c). The Equations9 and 11 also include a second vertical term

$\left( {\frac{dy_{1}}{dy_{2}} - \frac{dy_{1}^{c}}{dy_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

that indicates a squared difference between a ratio of the top framedistance dy₁ to the bottom frame distance dy₂, and a ratio of the topcrop distance dy₁ ^(c) to the bottom crop distance dy₂ ^(c). AlthoughEquations 8 through 11 include horizontal and vertical terms having asquared difference, other implementations are possible, such as termshaving an absolute difference (e.g.,

$\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)$

as an example horizontal term having an absolute difference).

To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation, the first and secondhorizontal and vertical terms each has a value that is decreased if theROI has a very similar location (e.g., horizontal centeredness, verticalcenteredness) within the crop candidate c as compared to within theframe I. In some cases, subtraction of the second horizontal term fromthe first horizontal term indicates whether the ROI has a centralhorizontal location in the image or a peripheral horizontal location inthe image. Furthermore, subtraction of the second vertical term from thefirst vertical term indicates whether the ROI has a central verticallocation in the image or a peripheral vertical location in the image.For example, if an example ROI is horizontally close to the center of anexample image, a difference of the first and second horizontal termscould have a value close to zero, and the horizontal composition term

(r_(i), c, I) or

(r_(j), c, I) could have a value that is close to zero. Additionally oralternatively, if the example ROI is vertically close to the center ofthe example image, a difference of the first and second vertical termscould have a value close to zero, and the vertical composition termV(r_(i), c, I) or V(r_(j), c, I) could have a value that is close tozero.

In the Equations 8 and 10, the first horizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is multiplied by a ratio

$\frac{dx_{1}}{W}$

of the left frame distance dx₁ to the frame width W, and the secondhorizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{1}}{dx_{2}} - \frac{dx_{1}^{c}}{dx_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is multiplied by a ratio

$\frac{dx_{2}}{W}$

of the right frame distance dx₂ to the frame width W. In the Equations 9and 11, the first vertical term

$\left( {\frac{dy_{2}}{dy_{1}} - \frac{dy_{2}^{c}}{dy_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is multiplied by a ratio

$\frac{dy_{1}}{H}$

of the top frame distance dy₁ to the frame height H, and the secondvertical term

$\left( {\frac{dy_{1}}{dy_{2}} - \frac{dy_{1}^{c}}{dy_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is multiplied by a ratio

$\frac{dy_{2}}{H}$

of the bottom frame distance dy_(e) to the frame height H. In Equations8 through 11, an exponential function is applied to a negativedifference between the first and second horizontal (or vertical) termsthat have been multiplied by the respective ratios. The exponent of thenegative difference indicates, for example, a similarity between themultiplied first and second terms.

In some cases, multiplying the first and second horizontal and verticalterms by the respective ratios indicates a location extremity of the ROIwith respect to the frame I. For example, if an ROI is horizontally veryfar to the left of an example image (e.g., the left frame distance dx₁has a very small value as compared to the right frame distance dx₂, theratio

$\frac{dx_{1}}{W}$

has a very small value as compared to the ratio

$\frac{dx_{2}}{W}.$

Additionally or alternatively, the value of the first horizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{2}}{dx_{1}} - \frac{dx_{2}^{c}}{dx_{1}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is reduced based on the very small value of the ratio

$\frac{dx_{1}}{W},$

and the value of the second horizontal term

$\left( {\frac{dx_{1}}{dx_{2}} - \frac{dx_{1}^{c}}{dx_{2}^{c}}} \right)^{2}$

is increased based on the relatively larger value of the ratio

$\frac{dx_{2}}{W}.$

In this example, the exponential function indicates a small similaritybetween the multiplied first and second horizontal terms (e.g., theexample ROI has dissimilar left and right frame distances).

To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation, the relative valuesof the first and second horizontal terms are adjusted by the respectiveratios

$\frac{dx_{1}}{W}\mspace{14mu}{or}\mspace{14mu}\frac{dx_{2}}{W}$

based on a horizontal extremity of the ROI's location, and the relativevalues of the first and second vertical terms are adjusted by therespective ratios

$\frac{dy_{1}}{H}\mspace{14mu}{or}\mspace{14mu}\frac{dy_{2}}{H}$

based on a vertical extremity of the ROI's location. In some cases,subtraction of the second horizontal term from the first horizontal termindicates whether the ROI has a horizontally central or peripherallocation in the image. For example, if an example ROI has a horizontallyextreme location in an example image (e.g., close to the left or rightimage periphery), a difference of the first and second horizontal termscould have an increased value, and the horizontal composition term

(r_(i), c, I) or

(r_(i), c, I) could have a value that is increased. Additionally oralternatively, subtraction of the second vertical term from the firstvertical term indicates whether the ROI has a vertically central orperipheral location in the image. For example, if the example ROI has avertically extreme location in the example image (e.g., close to the topor bottom image periphery), a difference of the first and secondvertical terms could have an increased value, and the verticalcomposition term V(r_(i), c, I) or V(r_(j), c, I) could have a valuethat is increased.

Selection of an Evaluated Crop Candidate

In a crop generation system, such as the crop generation system 200, acrop candidate is selected, such as for the set of selected candidates270, based on an evaluation score. The evaluation score is determinedbased on one or more component scores, such as a content preservationscore or a composition preservation score. For example, a crop candidateevaluation module in the crop generation system compares at least onecontent preservation score for a crop candidate to a content threshold.Additionally or alternatively, the evaluation module compares at leastone composition preservation score for a crop candidate to a compositionthreshold. A pool of crop candidates, such as the crop candidate pool225, is evaluated based on the content threshold and compositionthreshold, and one or more crop candidates are selected from thecandidate pool based on the multiple thresholds.

In some embodiments of the example crop generation system, theevaluation module evaluates a crop candidate pool based on multiplethresholds that are applied in a particular order. For example, theevaluation module applies a first content threshold to the pool of cropcandidates, and compares each candidate in the pool to the first contentthreshold. The evaluation module generates a first modified candidatepool by removing candidates that do not fulfill the first contentthreshold. In addition, the evaluation module applies a second contentthreshold to the first modified candidate pool, and generates a secondmodified candidate pool by removing candidates that do not fulfill thesecond content threshold. Furthermore, the evaluation module applies acomposition threshold to the second modified candidate pool, andgenerates a third modified candidate pool by removing candidates that donot fulfill the composition threshold.

In some cases, efficiency of the described evaluation techniques isincreased by performing operations related to computing a score orapplying a threshold in a particular order. As an example ofimprovements to efficiency, applying the composition thresholdsubsequent to applying the first and second content thresholds increasesefficiency of the described evaluation techniques. In this example, theevaluation module consumes fewer computing resources evaluating amodified candidate pool having had crop candidates removed (e.g., basedon the first or second content thresholds), as compared to evaluating anunmodified candidate pool that does not have crop candidates removed.

As an additional example of improvements to efficiency, computing aparticular one of the content preservation score or compositionpreservation score subsequent to applying a threshold increasesefficiency of the described evaluation techniques. For instance, a cropcandidate evaluation module calculates an eye fixation contentpreservation score F_(pf)(R_(f), c) (such as described in regards toEquation 4) for each crop candidate c in a pool of crop candidates.Based on the eye fixation content preservation scores, the evaluationmodule applies an eye fixation content threshold to the pool of cropcandidates. The evaluation module generates a first modified candidatepool by removing candidates that do not fulfill the eye fixation contentthreshold. Subsequently, the evaluation module calculates an objectcontent preservation score F_(pc)(R_(c), c) (such as described inregards to Equation 3) for each crop candidate c in the first modifiedcandidate pool. Based on the object content preservation scores, theevaluation module applies an object content threshold to the firstmodified candidate pool. The evaluation module generates a secondmodified candidate pool by removing candidates that do not fulfill theobject content threshold.

In this example, the evaluation module consumes fewer computingresources to calculate the object content preservation scores for cropcandidates in the first modified candidate pool, as compared tocalculating object content preservation scores for candidates in theoriginal (e.g., unmodified) pool of crop candidates. In some cases, animprovement in efficiency is provided by calculating multiple contentpreservation scores based on crop candidates in a modified candidatepool that has had one or more crop candidates removed based on aprevious comparison to a threshold.

Continuing with this example, the first modified candidate pool isgenerated based on the eye fixation content threshold being applied tothe pool of crop candidates. Additionally or alternatively, a modifiedcandidate pool could be generated based on the object content thresholdbeing applied to the original (e.g., unmodified) pool of cropcandidates. In some cases, an improvement in accuracy, efficiency, orboth is provided by generating a first modified candidate pool byapplying an eye fixation content threshold to an original (e.g.,unmodified) pool of crop candidates. For example, if the image beinganalyzed depicts zero or very few objects, such as a landscapephotograph, a modified candidate pool that is based on the eye fixationcontent threshold could include candidates that more accuratelyrepresent the visual content compared to a modified candidate pool basedon the object content threshold. Additionally or alternatively,generating the modified candidate pool based on the eye fixation contentthreshold provides improvements in efficiency to subsequent operations(e.g., applying a composition threshold), such as by omitting operationsrelated to candidates that do not accurately represent the visualcontent.

Continuing with this example, the evaluation module calculates an eyefixation composition preservation score F_(Cf), (R_(f), c, I) (such asdescribed in regards to Equation 7) for each crop candidate c in thesecond modified candidate pool. Based on the eye fixation compositionpreservation scores, the evaluation module applies an eye fixationcomposition threshold to the second modified candidate pool. Theevaluation module generates a third modified candidate pool by removingcandidates that do not fulfill the eye fixation composition threshold.In some cases, the third modified candidate pool is provided as aselected candidate set (e.g., selected candidates 270 that are providedto an image editing application). Additionally or alternatively, theevaluation module applies an object composition threshold to the thirdmodified candidate pool, and generates a fourth modified candidate poolby removing candidates that do not fulfill the object compositionthreshold. In some cases, the fourth modified candidate pool is providedas a selected candidate set.

In this example, the evaluation module consumes fewer computingresources to calculate the eye fixation composition preservation scoresfor crop candidates c in the second modified candidate pool, as comparedto calculating eye fixation composition preservation scores forcandidates in the original (e.g., unmodified) pool of crop candidates orin the first modified candidate pool. In some cases, an improvement inefficiency is provided by calculating multiple composition preservationscores based on crop candidates in a modified candidate pool that hashad one or more crop candidates removed based on a previous comparisonto at least one content threshold. For example, calculation of an eyefixation (or object) composition preservation score may requireadditional computing resources to determine horizontal and verticalcomposition terms. Calculating eye fixation or object compositionpreservation scores based on a modified candidate pool that is reducedin size (e.g., based on comparison to at least one content threshold)could reduce an amount of processing power, memory, or other computingresources required for the calculations.

In some embodiments of the example crop generation system, an evaluationmodule determines whether a particular crop candidate fulfills one ormore respective content thresholds for eye fixation content preservationor object content preservation. An example scoring function fordetermining eye fixation content preservation, by multiple cropcandidates c, of content in the eye fixation ensemble R_(f)={r_(i)j=1 .. . m} is provided in the example Equation 12. An example of anormalized content threshold for eye fixation content preservation isprovided in the example Equation 13.

₁(c)=F _(Pf)(R _(f) ,c)  Eq. 12

θ₁ max

₁(c)  Eq. 13

In Equation 12, the eye fixation content preservation score set S₁ (c)includes an eye fixation content preservation score F_(Pf), (R_(f), c)for each crop candidate c that is included in the crop candidate pool.In some cases, the crop candidate pool is provided from a crop candidategeneration module, such as the crop candidate pool 225 generated by thecrop candidate generation module 220. Additionally or alternatively, thecrop candidate pool is a modified candidate pool, such as a modifiedcandidate pool that has had one or more crop candidates removed based ona previous comparison to a threshold.

In Equation 13, a normalized content threshold for eye fixation contentpreservation is calculated based on a maximum value from the eyefixation content preservation score set S₁(c) multiplied by an eyefixation threshold parameter θ₁. In some cases, the evaluation modulegenerates a modified crop candidate pool based on the normalized eyefixation content threshold. To aid understanding, and not by way oflimitation, an increased value of the parameter θ₁ could result in anincreased normalized eye fixation content threshold, and the modifiedcandidate pool generated based on Equation 13 could be smaller (e.g.,more selective), as compared to if the parameter θ₁ has a decreasedvalue. In some cases, the eye fixation threshold parameter θ₁ isdetermined based on an input, such as an input from an image editingapplication or from a user computing device.

An example scoring function for determining object content preservation,by multiple crop candidates c, of content in the object ROI ensembleR_(c)={r_(i)=1 . . . n} is provided in the example Equation 14. Anexample of a normalized content threshold for object contentpreservation is provided in the example Equation 15. An example functionfor determining a combined content preservation score set is provided inthe example Equation 16.

₂(c)=F _(Pc)(R _(c) ,c)  Eq. 14

θ₂ max

₂(c)  Eq. 15

(c)=(

₁(c)+(

₂(c))  Eq. 16

In Equation 14, the object content preservation score set

₂ (C) includes an object content preservation score F_(Pc)(R_(c), c) foreach crop candidate c that is included in the crop candidate pool. Insome cases, the crop candidate pool is a modified candidate pool, suchas a modified candidate pool that has had one or more crop candidatesremoved based on a previous comparison to a threshold (e.g., anormalized eye fixation content threshold). Additionally oralternatively, the crop candidate pool is provided from a crop candidategeneration module, such as the crop candidate pool 225 generated by thecrop candidate generation module 220.

In Equation 15, a normalized content threshold for object contentpreservation is calculated based on a maximum value from the objectcontent preservation score set S₂(c) multiplied by an object thresholdparameter θ₂. In some cases, the evaluation module generates a modifiedcrop candidate pool based on the normalized object content threshold. Toaid understanding, and not by way of limitation, an increased value ofthe parameter θ₂ could result in an increased normalized object contentthreshold, and the modified candidate pool generated based on Equation15 could be smaller (e.g., more selective), as compared to if theparameter θ₂ has a decreased value. In some cases, the object thresholdparameter θ₂ is determined based on an input, such as an input from animage editing application or from a user computing device.

In Equation 16, a combined content preservation score is determined foreach crop candidate remaining in the modified candidate pool, based onthe content preservation score sets

₁(c) and

₂ (c). For example, the evaluation module determines the combinedcontent preservation score set

(c) for the set of crop candidates in the modified candidate pool. Inthis example, the eye fixation content preservation score set

₁(c) and the object content preservation score set

₂(c) are weighted equally (e.g., a weight of 0.5), but otherimplementations are possible. For example, a scene determination neuralnetwork could be applied to the image, such as described in regards toFIG. 2. If the image is determined to have a landscape scene type, theeye fixation content preservation score set

₁(c) could be weighted more heavily. If the image is determined to havea portrait scene type, the object content preservation score set

₂ (c) could be weighted more heavily.

In some embodiments of the example crop generation system, theevaluation module determines whether a particular crop candidatefulfills one or more respective composition thresholds for eye fixationcomposition preservation or object composition preservation. An examplescoring function for determining eye fixation composition preservation,by multiple crop candidates c, of content in the eye fixation ensembleR_(f)={r_(j),j=1 . . . m} is provided in the example Equation 17.

(c)=max{

₁(c),

₂(c)}  Eq. 17

In Equation 17, the eye fixation composition preservation score set

(c) has a value that is a maximum of a global composition preservationscore set

₁(c) and a local composition preservation score set

₂(c). An example scoring function for determining the global compositionpreservation score set

₁(c) is provided in the example Equation 18. An example scoring functionfor determining the local composition preservation score set

₂ (c) is provided in the example Equation 19.

₁(c)=F _(c)(G,c,I)  Eq. 18

₂(c)=F _(Cf)(R _(f) ,c,G)  Eq. 19

In Equations 18 and 19, composition preservation scores F_(C) and F_(Cf)are determined, such as described in regards to Equations 6 and 7. Thecomposition preservation scores F_(C) and F_(Cf) are determined for eachof the crop candidates c in the crop candidate pool (or modified cropcandidate pool). In Equations 18 and 19, a frame G is a bounding boxthat encompasses all of the ROIs included in the eye fixation ROIensemble R_(f) and a frame I is a bounding box that encompasses all ofthe image (e.g., the frame I has dimensions equal to the dimensions ofthe image). In some cases, the frame G is a tightly-fit bounding boxencompassing the eye fixation ROIs without encompassing additional(e.g., non-ROI) visual content of the image.

In Equation 18, the frame G is treated as a single ROI for the imageframe I. The composition preservation score F_(C) is determined for eachof the crop candidates c in the crop candidate pool (or modified cropcandidate pool). To aid understanding, and not by way of limitation,each composition preservation score F_(C) could indicate the relativecenteredness of the respective crop candidate c with respect to thecombination of all of the eye fixation ROIs, i.e., encompassed by theframe G. Additionally or alternatively, the composition preservationscore F_(C) for a particular crop candidate could have an increasedvalue if the particular candidate has a relatively similar position withrespect to the frame G as to the image frame I. In Equation 18, theglobal composition preservation score set

₁(c) includes a value for each of the crop candidates based on thecomposition preservation score F_(C).

In Equation 19, the composition preservation score F_(C)f is determinedfor each crop candidate with respect to the eye fixation ensembleR_(f)={r_(j), j=1 . . . m}, within the frame G. To aid understanding,and not by way of limitation, each composition preservation score F_(Cf)could indicate the relative centeredness of the respective cropcandidate c with respect to each particular eye fixation ROI included inthe ensemble R_(f). Additionally or alternatively, the compositionpreservation score F_(Cf) for a particular crop candidate could have anincreased value if the particular candidate has a relatively similarposition with respect to the particular eye fixation ROI as to the frameG. In Equation 19, the local composition preservation score set

₂ (c) includes a value for each of the crop candidates based on thecomposition preservation score F_(Cf).

In Equation 17, the eye fixation composition preservation score set

(c) includes a value for each of the crop candidates c in the cropcandidate pool (or modified crop candidate pool), based on a maximum ofthe global composition preservation score set

₁(c) and the local composition preservation score set

₂ (c). In some cases, the evaluation module modifies (or additionallymodifies) the crop candidate pool based on a composition threshold. Anexample of a normalized composition threshold for eye fixationcomposition preservation is provided in the example Equation 20.

θ₃ max

(c)  Eq. 20

In Equation 20, a normalized composition threshold for eye fixationcomposition preservation is calculated based on a maximum value from theeye fixation composition preservation score set

(c) multiplied by a composition threshold parameter θ₃. In some cases,the evaluation module generates a modified crop candidate pool based onthe normalized eye fixation composition threshold. To aid understanding,and not by way of limitation, an increased value of the parameter θ₃could result in an increased normalized eye fixation compositionthreshold, and the modified candidate pool generated based on Equation20 could be smaller (e.g., more selective), as compared to if theparameter θ₃ has a decreased value. In some cases, the compositionthreshold parameter θ₃ is determined based on an input, such as an inputfrom an image editing application or from a user computing device.

The Equations 17 through 20 are explained herein in relation to eyefixation composition preservation. However, additional implementationsare possible, such as by applying the Equations 17 through 20 an objectensemble R_(C)={r_(i), i=1 . . . n} to determine object compositionpreservation by multiple crop candidates c.

In some embodiments, the evaluation module determines the evaluationscore for each particular crop candidate based on a combination of therespective content preservation score and composition preservation scorefor the particular crop candidate. An example function for determiningan evaluation score set is provided in the example Equation 21.

J(c)=0.5(

(c)+

(c)  Eq. 21

In Equation 21, an evaluation score is determined for each cropcandidate remaining in the modified candidate pool, based on acombination of the content preservation score set

(c) and the composition preservation score set

(c). In this example, the content preservation score set

(c) and the composition preservation score set

(c) are weighted equally (e.g., a weight of 0.5), but otherimplementations are possible. For example, if the image includesmultiple ROIs in various locations, the content preservation score set

(c) could be weighted more heavily. If the image includes a small numberof ROIs in a peripheral location, the composition preservation score set

(c) could be weighted more heavily.

In some embodiments, the evaluation module selects one or more cropcandidates, such as for the selected candidate set 270, based on theevaluation score set a(c). For example, the evaluation scores in theevaluation score set

(c) are compared to an evaluation threshold. Based on each evaluationscore's relation to the evaluation threshold, each respective cropcandidate is included in or omitted from a set of selected cropcandidates. Additionally or alternatively, the evaluation moduleperforms one or more operations related to non-maximum suppression. Forexample, the evaluation module determines multiple subsets of scores inthe evaluation score set

(c). In some cases, each of the subsets corresponds to a group of cropcandidates that represent similar portions of the visual content, suchas a group of crop candidates with slightly different coordinates, butwhich each include similar or identical ROIs. Based on the non-maximumsuppression, one or more crop candidates that are within a thresholdsimilarity to another crop candidate are omitted from the selectedcandidate set (e.g., similar candidates within a group are omitted). Insome cases, applying non-maximum suppression to the subsets provides avariety of crop candidates for inclusion in the selected candidate set.

Any suitable computing system or group of computing systems can be usedfor performing the operations described herein. For example, FIG. 7 is ablock diagram depicting a computing system configured to provideautomatic generation and evaluation of crop candidates, according tocertain embodiments.

The depicted example of an automatic cropping system 701 includes one ormore processors 702 communicatively coupled to one or more memorydevices 704. The processor 702 executes computer-executable program codeor accesses information stored in the memory device 704. Examples ofprocessor 702 include a microprocessor, an application-specificintegrated circuit (“ASIC”), a field-programmable gate array (“FPGA”),or other suitable processing device. The processor 702 can include anynumber of processing devices, including one.

The memory device 704 includes any suitable non-transitorycomputer-readable medium for storing the crop generation system 100, thecrop candidate pool 125, the ROI ensemble(s) 145, the saliency data 135,and other received or determined values or data objects. Thecomputer-readable medium can include any electronic, optical, magnetic,or other storage device capable of providing a processor withcomputer-readable instructions or other program code. Non-limitingexamples of a computer-readable medium include a magnetic disk, a memorychip, a ROM, a RAM, an ASIC, optical storage, magnetic tape or othermagnetic storage, or any other medium from which a processing device canread instructions. The instructions may include processor-specificinstructions generated by a compiler or an interpreter from code writtenin any suitable computer-programming language, including, for example,C, C++, C #, Visual Basic, Java, Python, Perl, JavaScript, andActionScript.

The automatic cropping system 701 may also include a number of externalor internal devices such as input or output devices. For example, theautomatic cropping system 701 is shown with an input/output (“I/O”)interface 708 that can receive input from input devices or provideoutput to output devices. A bus 706 can also be included in theautomatic cropping system 701. The bus 706 can communicatively coupleone or more components of the automatic cropping system 701.

The automatic cropping system 701 executes program code that configuresthe processor 702 to perform one or more of the operations describedabove with respect to FIGS. 1-6. The program code includes operationsrelated to, for example, one or more of the crop generation system 100,the crop candidate pool 125, the ROI ensemble(s) 145, the saliency data135, or other suitable applications or memory structures that performone or more operations described herein. The program code may beresident in the memory device 704 or any suitable computer-readablemedium and may be executed by the processor 702 or any other suitableprocessor. In some embodiments, the program code described above, thecrop generation system 100, the crop candidate pool 125, the ROIensemble(s) 145, and the saliency data 135 are stored in the memorydevice 704, as depicted in FIG. 7. In additional or alternativeembodiments, one or more of the crop generation system 100, the cropcandidate pool 125, the ROI ensemble(s) 145, the saliency data 135, andthe program code described above are stored in one or more memorydevices accessible via a data network, such as a memory deviceaccessible via a cloud service.

The automatic cropping system 701 depicted in FIG. 7 also includes atleast one network interface 710. The network interface 710 includes anydevice or group of devices suitable for establishing a wired or wirelessdata connection to one or more data networks 712. Non-limiting examplesof the network interface 710 include an Ethernet network adapter, amodem, and/or the like. A remote system 715 is connected to theautomatic cropping system 701 via network 712, and remote system 715 canperform some of the operations described herein, such as generating cropcandidates, determining saliency data, or implementing a scenedetermination neural network model. The automatic cropping system 701 isable to communicate with one or more of the remote computing system 715,the camera device 105, the image editing application 180, or the imagerepository 102 using the network interface 710. Although FIG. 7 depictsthe image editing application 180 as connected to automatic croppingsystem 701 via the networks 712, other embodiments are possible,including the image editing application 180 running as a program in thememory 704 of automatic cropping system 701.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Numerous specific details are set forth herein to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the claimed subject matter. However, those skilled inthe art will understand that the claimed subject matter may be practicedwithout these specific details. In other instances, methods,apparatuses, or systems that would be known by one of ordinary skillhave not been described in detail so as not to obscure claimed subjectmatter.

Unless specifically stated otherwise, it is appreciated that throughoutthis specification discussions utilizing terms such as “processing,”“computing,” “calculating,” “determining,” and “identifying” or the likerefer to actions or processes of a computing device, such as one or morecomputers or a similar electronic computing device or devices, thatmanipulate or transform data represented as physical electronic ormagnetic quantities within memories, registers, or other informationstorage devices, transmission devices, or display devices of thecomputing platform.

The system or systems discussed herein are not limited to any particularhardware architecture or configuration. A computing device can includeany suitable arrangement of components that provides a resultconditioned on one or more inputs. Suitable computing devices includemultipurpose microprocessor-based computer systems accessing storedsoftware that programs or configures the computing system from a generalpurpose computing apparatus to a specialized computing apparatusimplementing one or more embodiments of the present subject matter. Anysuitable programming, scripting, or other type of language orcombinations of languages may be used to implement the teachingscontained herein in software to be used in programming or configuring acomputing device.

Embodiments of the methods disclosed herein may be performed in theoperation of such computing devices. The order of the blocks presentedin the examples above can be varied—for example, blocks can bere-ordered, combined, and/or broken into sub-blocks. Certain blocks orprocesses can be performed in parallel.

The use of “adapted to” or “configured to” herein is meant as open andinclusive language that does not foreclose devices adapted to orconfigured to perform additional tasks or steps. Additionally, the useof “based on” is meant to be open and inclusive, in that a process,step, calculation, or other action “based on” one or more recitedconditions or values may, in practice, be based on additional conditionsor values beyond those recited. Headings, lists, and numbering includedherein are for ease of explanation only and are not meant to belimiting.

While the present subject matter has been described in detail withrespect to specific embodiments thereof, it will be appreciated thatthose skilled in the art, upon attaining an understanding of theforegoing, may readily produce alterations to, variations of, andequivalents to such embodiments. Accordingly, it should be understoodthat the present disclosure has been presented for purposes of examplerather than limitation, and does not preclude inclusion of suchmodifications, variations, and/or additions to the present subjectmatter as would be readily apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of producing a crop candidate for agraphical digital image, the method comprising: identifying, for aninput image, a first crop candidate and a second crop candidate, whereinthe first crop candidate and the second crop candidate encompass firstand second portions of the input image; generating a first ROI thatencompasses a first portion of the input image having visual contentindicated by saliency data for the input image; computing a firstevaluation score for the first crop candidate and a second evaluationscore for the second crop candidate, wherein each evaluation scoreindicates a preservation, by a respective crop candidate, of the visualcontent that is included in at least the first ROI; generating, based onthe first evaluation score and the second evaluation score, a selectedset of crop candidates that includes the first crop candidate and thatexcludes the second crop candidate; and providing the selected set ofcrop candidates.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the saliency datacomprises (i) an eye fixation saliency map indicating a region of theinput image that is likely to receive visual attention, and (ii) anobject saliency map indicating a location of an object depicted in theinput image.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein each evaluation score iscomputed from a composition preservation score indicating a relativecrop position of the first ROI with respect to the respective cropcandidate.
 4. The method of claim 3, further comprising computing acontent preservation score by performing operations comprising:determining a ratio between a total area of the first ROI and anoverlapping area that is included in the first ROI and in the respectivecrop candidate; determining, based on the ratio, that the first ROI isencompassed by the respective crop candidate; and determining a quantityof ROIs based on a summation of the ratio and an additional ratioindicating an additional ROI in an ROI ensemble that is encompassed bythe respective crop candidate.
 5. The method of claim 4, furthercomprising computing the content preservation score by performingoperations comprising: determining a ratio between a total area of asecond ROI and an overlapping area that is included in the second ROIand in the respective crop candidate; determining, based on the ratio,that the respective crop candidate incompletely encompasses the secondROI; and responsive to determining that the respective crop candidateincompletely encompasses the second ROI, computing the contentpreservation score based on a summation between (i) the quantity of ROIsthat are encompassed by the respective crop candidate, and (ii) theratio.
 6. The method of claim 3, further comprising computing thecomposition preservation score by performing operations comprising:determining the relative crop position of the first ROI by computing afirst distance between an edge of the first ROI to an edge of therespective crop candidate and a second distance between an additionaledge of the first ROI to an additional edge of the respective cropcandidate; determining a relative frame position of the first ROI bycomputing a third distance between the edge of the first ROI to an edgeof a frame of the input image and a fourth distance between theadditional edge of the first ROI to an additional edge of the frame ofthe input image; and determining a difference between the relative frameposition and the relative crop position.
 7. The method of claim 3,further comprising computing the composition preservation score bydetermining a sum of (i) the relative crop position of the first ROI and(ii) an additional relative crop position of a second ROI with respectto the respective crop candidate.
 8. The method of claim 4, whereincomputing each evaluation score further comprises: determining a groupof crop candidates including the first crop candidate and the secondcrop candidate; determining that a first content preservation score forthe first crop candidate is within a first threshold difference from amaximum content preservation score associated with the group of cropcandidates; responsive to determining that the first contentpreservation score is within the first threshold difference, generatinga content-filtered group of crop candidates by selecting the first cropcandidate from the group of crop candidates; determining that a firstcomposition preservation score for the first crop candidate is within asecond threshold difference from a maximum composition preservationscore associated with the group of crop candidates; responsive todetermining that the first composition preservation score is within thesecond threshold difference, generating a composition-filtered group ofcrop candidates by selecting the first crop candidate from the group ofcrop candidates; and responsive to determining that the first cropcandidate is included in the content-filtered group of crop candidatesand in the composition-filtered group of crop candidates, computing anevaluation score of the first crop candidate.
 9. The method of claim 8,wherein computing each evaluation score further comprises: generating aglobal bounding frame that encompasses a plurality of ROIs in an ROIensemble, including the first ROI, and omits a portion of the inputimage that is not included in any of the multiple ROIs in the ROIensemble, wherein the first composition preservation score is based on(i) a global relative crop position of the global bounding frame withrespect to the first crop candidate, and (ii) a respective relative cropposition of each of the multiple ROIs in the ROI ensemble with respectto the first crop candidate.
 10. A non-transitory computer-readablemedium embodying program code for producing a crop candidate for agraphical digital image, the program code comprising instructions which,when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operationscomprising: identifying, for an input image, a first crop candidate anda second crop candidate, wherein the first crop candidate and the secondcrop candidate encompass a first portion and a second portion of theinput image; generating one or more regions of interest (ROI), whereineach of the one or more ROI have visual content indicated by saliencydata for the input image; computing a first evaluation score for thefirst crop candidate and a second evaluation score for the second cropcandidate, wherein each evaluation score indicates a representation, bya respective crop candidate, of the visual content included in the oneor more ROI; generating, based on the first evaluation score and thesecond evaluation score, a selected set of crop candidates that includesthe first crop candidate and that excludes the second crop candidate;and providing the selected set of crop candidates.
 11. Thenon-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 10, wherein thesaliency data comprises (i) an eye fixation saliency map indicating aregion of the input image that is likely to receive visual attention,and (ii) an object saliency map indicating a location of an objectdepicted in the input image.
 12. The non-transitory computer-readablemedium of claim 10, wherein computing the first evaluation score furthercomprises: computing a content preservation score indicating a set ofROIs, of the one or more ROIs, that are encompassed by the first cropcandidate; and computing a composition preservation score indicating arelative crop position of a first ROI of the one or more ROIs withrespect to the first crop candidate, wherein the first evaluation scoreis based on a combination of a content preservation score and thecomposition preservation score.
 13. The non-transitory computer-readablemedium of claim 12, wherein computing the content preservation scorefurther comprises: determining a ratio between a total area of the firstROI and an overlapping area that is included in the first ROI and in therespective crop candidate; determining, based on the ratio, that thefirst ROI is encompassed by the respective crop candidate; anddetermining the quantity of ROIs based on a summation of the ratio andan additional ratio indicating an additional ROI that is encompassed bythe respective crop candidate.
 14. The non-transitory computer-readablemedium of claim 12, wherein computing the composition preservation scorefurther comprises: determining the relative crop position of the firstROI by computing a first distance between an edge of the first ROI to anedge of the respective crop candidate and a second distance between anadditional edge of the first ROI to an additional edge of the respectivecrop candidate; determining a relative frame position of the first ROIby computing a third distance between the edge of the first ROI to anedge of a frame of the input image and a fourth distance between theadditional edge of the first ROI to an additional edge of the frame ofthe input image; and determining a difference between the relative frameposition and the relative crop position.
 15. A system for producing acrop candidate for a graphical digital image, the system comprising: aprocessor configured for identifying, for an input image, a first cropcandidate and a second crop candidate, wherein the first crop candidateand the second crop candidate each encompass portions of the inputimage; a means for generating at least one region of interest (ROI),wherein the at least one ROI encompasses a first portion of the inputimage, the at least one ROI having visual content indicated by saliencydata for the input image; and a means for computing a first evaluationscore for the first crop candidate and a second evaluation score for thesecond crop candidate, wherein each evaluation score indicates arepresentation, by a respective crop candidate, of the visual contentincluded in the at least one ROI; wherein the processor is furtherconfigured for: generating, based on the first evaluation score and thesecond evaluation score, a selected set of crop candidates that includesthe first crop candidate and that excludes the second crop candidate;and providing the selected set of crop candidates.
 16. The system ofclaim 15, wherein the saliency data comprises (i) an eye fixationsaliency map indicating a region of the input image that is likely toreceive visual attention, and (ii) an object saliency map indicating alocation of an object depicted in the input image.
 17. The system ofclaim 15, wherein computing each evaluation score comprises computing acomposition preservation score indicating a relative crop position ofthe first ROI with respect to the respective crop candidate.
 18. Thesystem of claim 17, wherein computing the content preservation scorecomprises: determining a ratio between a total area of the first ROI andan overlapping area that is included in the first ROI and in therespective crop candidate; determining, based on the ratio, that thefirst ROI is encompassed by the respective crop candidate; anddetermining the quantity of ROIs based on a summation of the ratio andan additional ratio indicating an additional ROI that is encompassed bythe respective crop candidate.
 19. The system of claim 17, whereincomputing the content preservation score comprises: determining a ratiobetween a total area of a second ROI and an overlapping area that isincluded in the second ROI and in the respective crop candidate;determining, based on the ratio, that the respective crop candidateincompletely encompasses the second ROI; and computing, responsive todetermining that the respective crop candidate incompletely encompassesthe second ROI, the content preservation score based on a summationbetween (i) a quantity of ROIs that are encompassed by the respectivecrop candidate, and (ii) the ratio.
 20. The system of claim 17, whereincomputing the composition preservation score comprises: determining therelative crop position of the first ROI by computing a first distancebetween an edge of the first ROI to an edge of the respective cropcandidate and a second distance between an additional edge of the firstROI to an additional edge of the respective crop candidate; determininga relative frame position of the first ROI by computing a third distancebetween the edge of the first ROI to an edge of a frame of the inputimage and a fourth distance between the additional edge of the first ROIto an additional edge of the frame of the input image; and determining adifference between the relative frame position and the relative cropposition.